Judgment and Decision Making

All original¹ relevant articles will be considered, including short articles, attempted replications of surprising results, and adversarial collaborations, as well as new empirical contributions and theoretical articles. We encourage the submission of raw data at the time of review, and we can archive the data of accepted articles.

Relevant articles deal with normative, descriptive, and/or prescriptive analyses of human judgments and decisions. These include, but are not limited to: experimental studies of judgments of hypothetical scenarios; experimental economic approaches to individual and group behavior; use of physiological methods to understand human judgments and decisions; discussion of normative models such as utility theory; and applications of relevant theory to medicine, law, consumer behavior, business, public choice, and public economics.

Submitted articles will be examined by the Editor and possibly by one Associate Editor before they are sent for review. Usually the review will involve one Consulting Editor and another reviewer. This process is designed to insure speedy rejection when rejection seems warranted. The review process itself should take at most a few weeks, depending on the length of the article. Authors may remove their names if they wish, and reviewers may reveal theirs.

Submitted articles must be readable by reviewers in some electronic form. Reviewers prefer tables, figures, and footnotes in the text, not at the end. Articles accepted for publication should follow the citation conventions (only) of the American Psychological Association. More specific requirements are here.

Send submissions, comments, or questions to the Editor, Jonathan Baron, at baron@psych.upenn.edu.

Editorial Board

Editor

Associate Editors

Consulting Editors