Cogpsych Topic Selection

---
name: cogpsych-topic-selection
description: Use when deciding whether a cognition project fits Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) and what contribution shape to target. The journal favors longer, integrative, model-driven work that produces a substantial theoretical advance — not a single isolated effect. Frames the question and the model-or-theory payoff; it does not collect data.
---

# Topic Selection & Fit (cogpsych-topic-selection)

Cognitive Psychology publishes **longer, integrative articles that have a major impact on theories of
cognition**. The bar is a **substantial theoretical advance** — usually carried by a **multi-experiment
program tied to a formal/computational model**, an incisive experimental series, or a modeling/review
contribution. Use this skill to pressure-test fit before investing.

## When to trigger

- Choosing among possible projects or framings for Cognitive Psychology
- A reader said the work feels "one effect," "atheoretical," or "better as a short report"
- Deciding whether the contribution needs a formal model, more experiments, or both
- A modeling or review project you want to place

## The fit test

A strong Cognitive Psychology paper usually clears all four:

1. **Theoretical advance, not an effect.** It changes a theory of cognition — adjudicates between
   accounts, formalizes a mechanism, or maps a phenomenon's boundary — rather than adding one more
   demonstration. State the theory it moves.
2. **Integrative scope.** The contribution is carried by a **program** (multiple experiments and/or a
   model fit to data), not a single study. Each piece must add inference.
3. **Formal/computational backbone where apt.** Cognition here is often expressed as a model that is
   **fit and compared**; if your account can be formalized, the venue rewards doing so (see
   `cogpsych-theory-and-hypotheses`).
4. **Reproducible and shareable.** You can deposit data, **model/analysis code**, and materials so the
   modeling is reproducible (see `cogpsych-open-science-and-transparency`).

## Contribution shape

- **Multi-experiment empirical** — a controlled series that jointly constrains a theory (each
  experiment rules out an alternative or extends scope).
- **Experiment + model** — the journal's signature shape: experiments designed to discriminate models,
  with a formal model fit to the data and compared to rivals.
- **Modeling-led** — a new model (or analysis) tested by fitting, model recovery, and comparison
  against existing or new data.
- **Theoretical / integrative review** — a synthesis that delivers a substantive theoretical advance,
  not a literature catalogue.

## Fit scoring — worked example (illustrative)

Score a candidate against the four gates before investing. A recognition-memory project, two framings:

```
Candidate A (off-fit): one N = 40 experiment showing a novel list-length
            effect, described verbally, no model, request-only data.
  Theoretical advance ✗ (one effect)   Integrative scope ✗ (single study)
  Formal backbone ✗ (verbal only)      Reproducible ✗ (request-only)
  Verdict: off-fit → either grow into a model-driven program or place as a
           short report elsewhere.

Candidate B (strong): three experiments that separate unequal-variance signal
            detection from a dual-process account, both models fit and
            compared, open data + model code.
  Theoretical advance ✓ (adjudicates two theories)  Integrative scope ✓
  Formal backbone ✓ (fit + compared)   Reproducible ✓ (code deposited)
  Verdict: strong fit → Experiment + model contribution.
```

## Contribution-type decision rules

| If the work is... | Target shape | Why |
|-------------------|--------------|-----|
| A controlled series constraining one theory | Multi-experiment empirical | the integrative arc the venue expects |
| Experiments that can discriminate formal models | Experiment + model | the journal's signature, highest-impact shape |
| A new model tested by fitting + recovery + comparison | Modeling-led | formal contribution to theory |
| A synthesis with a genuine theoretical advance | Integrative review | not a catalogue; must reframe the field |
| One surprising effect, no theory, no model | wrong venue (reframe) | belongs in a short-report journal |

## Sibling-journal fit guard

- **Cognition (Elsevier)** also takes cognition papers but is broader and more effect-/phenomenon-led;
  Cognitive Psychology skews longer and more model-driven.
- **JEP: General (APA)** overlaps but Cognitive Psychology leans harder into formal modeling and the
  multi-experiment program.
- **Psychological Science** wants short, single-finding reports — the opposite length/ambition.
- **Journal of Memory and Language** is the natural home for memory/language work that is narrower in
  scope; bring the integrative-model contribution here.

## Reviewer / editor pushback at the fit stage

- "This is one effect" → identify the theory it adjudicates and the further experiments/model that make
  it a program.
- "Atheoretical" → formalize the mechanism; show the model that the experiments test.
- "Better as a short report" → if it cannot sustain a long, integrative argument, it is the wrong venue.

## Anti-patterns

- A single experiment reporting one isolated effect with no formal/theoretical payoff
- A "model" that is only verbal and never fit or compared
- A review that catalogues the literature without a theoretical advance
- A project whose modeling cannot be reproduced because code/data cannot be shared

## Output format

```
【Question / phenomenon】one sentence
【Theoretical advance】which theory it moves, and how
【Scope】program of experiments and/or a fitted model? [Y/N]
【Formal backbone】can it be formalized + compared? [Y/N/NA]
【Reproducible】data + model code + materials shareable? [Y/N]
【Type】Multi-experiment / Experiment + model / Modeling-led / Review
【Fit verdict】strong / needs reframing / off-fit (why)
【Next】cogpsych-theory-and-hypotheses
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — modeling and model-comparison tooling
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — scope, article types, and house style