Content
Before you submit your review . . .
First Page
☐ Are your name, title, and affiliation provided at the top of the first page?
☐ Are the name, title, and affiliation provided for your co-author, if any?
☐ Does your affiliation reflect the institution or institutions where the work was completed?
Format
☐ Is the manuscript consistent with the policies, format, and content requirements described in the Reviewer’s Guide and Information?
☐ Does the entire manuscript represent original work (i.e., not previously published, not under concurrent consideration elsewhere, not written by non-human methods such as artificial intelligence)?
☐ Is the manuscript between 1,000 and 1,600 words (excluding references)?
☐ Is the entire manuscript (including references) double-spaced?
☐ Is the manuscript free of boldfacing?
Quotations
☐ Are all quotations (including those taken from the test materials) enclosed within quotation marks?
☐ Are reference citations and page numbers provided for all quotations, including those taken from the test manual or materials?
☐ Are quotations used sparingly (i.e., manuscript contains no more than 100 words in total drawn from the work of others)?
☐ Are ideas from other authors properly credited to them?
☐ Have you avoided disclosing actual test items?
Paragraphs and Sections
☐ Are all five review sections (Description, Development, Technical, Commentary, Summary) included and ordered correctly?
☐ Does the content in each section align with our expectations?
☐ If an earlier version of the test was reviewed in a previous yearbook, have you consulted the review(s) and noted which of the reviewers’ concerns (a) have been addressed in the current version, and (b) persist in the current version?
☐ Does each paragraph comprise more than a single sentence? Is each paragraph less than one manuscript page?
☐ Have you avoided using bulleted lists, tables, figures, notes, and footnotes?
☐ If subheadings are used, are they used appropriately (i.e., to separate content coverage as suggested in our reviewer guidelines)?
☐ Is the Technical section sufficiently detailed? (Refer to the Reviewer’s Guide and Information for additional guidance.)
☐ Are all (or nearly all) comments presented in the Commentary section?
Acronyms, Abbreviations, Statistical Symbols
☐ Are all test-related acronyms used consistent with those used by the test publisher?
☐ Have you avoided creating acronyms or abbreviations?
☐ Are all Latin abbreviations (such as i.e., e.g., etc.) used within parentheses only, per APA style?
☐ Are all non-Greek letters that are statistical symbols presented in italic font (e.g., n, r, p), per APA style?
☐ Are Greek letters spelled out (to accommodate format specifications of database exports)?
☐ Have you avoided using subscripts and superscripts (again, to accommodate format specifications of database exports)?
References (see Reference Examples for proper format)
☐ Do all citations within the manuscript correspond with entries in the References listed at the end of the work (e.g., names and dates)?
☐ Are the titles of journals spelled out completely, per APA style?
☐ Are page numbers provided for journal articles and chapters in edited books?
☐ Are references ordered alphabetically by authors’ surnames in the reference list?
☐ Are references ordered alphabetically by authors’ surnames in the text where multiple references are cited within parentheses?
Reference Examples
Note: Our format closely models that of APA. We use paragraph (rather than hanging) indentation to facilitate print production of yearbooks and database exportation.
Book
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.).
Ryan, A. M., & Tippins, N. T. (2009). Designing and implementing global selection systems. Wiley-Blackwell.
Edited book (in its entirety)
Anderson, N., Schlueter, J. E., Carlson, J. F., & Geisinger, K. F. (Eds.). (2016). Tests in print IX. Buros Center for Testing.
Carlson, J. F., Geisinger, K. F., & Jonson, J. L. (Eds.). (2021). The twenty-first mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.
Chapter in an edited book
Geisinger, K. F., & McCormick, C. (2016). Testing individuals with disabilities: An international perspective. In F. T. L. Leong, D. Bartram, F. M. Cheung, K. F. Geisinger, & D. Iliescu (Eds.), The ITC international handbook of testing and assessment (Vol. 1, pp. 259–275). Oxford University Press.
Test review retrieved from a print volume
Sandoval, J. (2014). [Test review of Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence–Second Edition]. In J. F. Carlson, K. F. Geisinger, & J. L. Jonson (Eds.), The nineteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 729–731). Buros Center for Testing.
Test review retrieved from an aggregator (EBSCO or Ovid)
Sandoval, J. (2014). [Test review of Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence–Second Edition]. In J. F. Carlson, K. F. Geisinger, & J. L. Jonson (Eds.), The nineteenth mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.
Test review retrieved from Test Reviews Online
Sandoval, J. (2014). [Test review of Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence–Second Edition]. In J. F. Carlson, K. F. Geisinger, & J. L. Jonson (Eds.), The nineteenth mental measurements yearbook. http://marketplace.unl.edu/buros/
Published test
Bayley, N., & Alward, G. P. (2019). Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Fourth Edition. Pearson.
Journal article (with up to 20 authors)
Carlson, J. F. (2020). Context and regulation of homeschooling: Issues, evidence, and assessment practices, School Psychology, 35(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000335
Jonson, J. L., Trantham, P., & Usher-Tate, B. J. (2019). An evaluative framework for reviewing fairness standards and practices in educational tests. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 38(3), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12259
Lee, H., & Geisinger, K. F. (2016). The matching criterion purification for differential item functioning analyses in a large-scale assessment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76(1), 141–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164415585166
Paper/poster presentation
Geisinger, K. F. (2017, April). Fairness of non-cognitive measures depends upon their uses. In M. Oliveri (Chair), Innovative approaches to fairly designing and developing non-cognitive measures for diverse populations. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Antonio, TX.
Jonson, J., & Usher-Tate, B. (2016, July). Fairness in testing: Evaluating the alignment of recommendations and practices. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the International Test Commission, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Article in press/preprint article
Lee, S., Kim, M-H., McDonough, I. M., Mendoza, J. S., & Kim, M-S. (in press). The effects of cell phone use and personality on college students’ learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3323