Editor Introduction

Being selected as the eighth editor of the Journal of Family Communication is a delight and privilege. Not only do I get to give back to the discipline, but I get to do it from the comfort of my home (or office, or home office), in sweatpants, and without many public facing responsibilities, which makes my introverted heart sing. My path to this editorship is perhaps different than my predecessors. I haven’t received prestigious awards from our national or regional associations, I am not incredibly well networked (thanks to my introverted tendencies), nor am I considered a “big name” in the field. I share this not to be self-effacing or place doubt in anyone’s mind (don’t worry, the journal is in good hands!), but instead to let young scholars, introverted researchers, or firstgeneration students, like myself, know that there is no “right way” to do this career. As my peers and colleagues excelled in more public facing roles, I, as Fiona Apple (1999) once sang, did “my thing in the background” – happy to serve as a paper reader for conferences, reviewer or editorial board member for journals, and committee member for article awards. When the Journal of Family Communication was looking for a new editor, I knew that this was an opportunity to serve our discipline in a way that felt authentic to me and complimented my strengths and personality. Additionally, after nearly 20 years in academia I had ideas, lots of them, for things I wanted to see changed or initiatives I wanted to spearhead. I was honored to be selected and to receive the baton from the inimitable Scott Myers.

The first time I worked with Scott was on an article award committee for CSCA. We had not met before, but after hearing his speech, riddled with his trademark humor, at the award ceremony I knew he was “good people.” I have had the privilege of working with him in other capacities since and am so thankful for his guidance and humor during the editorial transition period. I am excited to continue his work and maintain the high profile he helped the journal attain, including gaining its first impact factor. I would also like to thank all the previous editors who have so graciously reached out offering support. I stand on the shoulders of giants and am excited to continue the work. I am also grateful for members of my editorial board, a mix of familiar faces and new voices, who bring diverse methodological and paradigmatic perspectives to their roles, helping to ensure well matched reviews and expert feedback.

In keeping in line with the journal’s mission, I will solicit research articles and research reports. Research articles follow the traditional manuscript format (e.g., Theoretical Background, Method, Results, and Discussion) in addition to a practical implications section that translates results into actionable practices for audiences outside of academia, including counselors and social services providers. Research reports are a truncated version of a research study and should focus on interpretation of results or findings, thus making them ideal for topics and theories readers of Journal of Family Communication are familiar with.

I am also soliciting a third type of manuscript – replication articles. These articles should replicate important findings in the field of family communication. Ideally, replications will be direct or statistical replications with identical measures, samples, and procedures (Hunter, 2001), but conceptual replications (e.g., adding an additional variable) will also be considered. Replication articles should (a) provide strong warrant for the replication, including why it is necessary and important to the field, (b) summarize how the original study was carried out and detail how the current study will adhere to and/or deviate from the original (e.g., additional variable as a mediator or moderator; more sophisticated analyses), and (c) discuss how findings replicate, fail to replicate, or extend the original results. Following my predecessors, I aim to have editorial decisions made within 90 days of submission and I thank my editorial board members and ad hoc reviewers for their help with this. I appreciate the time they dedicate to conducting quality and timely reviews. Although the labor is unpaid, it is most definitely not unseen.

Across these submission types, I encourage scholars to draw inspiration from the “Setting the Agenda” articles published under Scott Myers’ editorship (e.g., Hutchins & Nelson, 2021; Lannutti et al., 2021) and submit scholarship that extends understanding of family communication processes beyond white, cis-hetero or WEIRD populations to produce more representative and inclusive work. From ethnic-racial and global diversity (Soliz & Phillips, 2018) to diverse family types (Turner & West, 2018), we need to continue to expand our theoretical and practical understanding of families to reflect the lived experiences of modern families. A common obstacle to this, however, is the nature of academia. Specifically, the “publish or perish” pressure faced by pre-tenure scholars. This demand often precludes the ability to collect data from diverse samples, which is time consuming, resulting in an overreliance on convenience samples at universities, resulting in predominately white and female samples.

As such, I will be working with Taylor & Francis to obtain the journal’s Pre-Registration badge. It is my hope that pre-registered studies will provide a space for scholars to conduct this research by eliminating the uncertainty regarding if the time and resources put into studying hard to reach and more representative samples will “pay off” with a publication. Additionally, pre-registration can reduce bias in the review process since reviewers will evaluate studies based on their theoretical argument and methodology without being skewed by whether results are statistically significant or support existing findings, perhaps including their own (McEwan et al., 2018).

Other initiatives will take place behind the scenes, including a student reviewer program that is geared toward uncovering the “hidden curriculum” of academic publishing, especially for first generation students and students who are not as well-represented within the academy. Through this program, an annual cohort of PhD students will gain firsthand experience of the review process including understanding the rationale guiding decisions about whether to send a manuscript out for review, selecting reviewers, interpreting/understanding reviewer feedback, and making decisions based on reviewer recommendations. Students will meet with me as well as other editorial board mentors to talk through these processes and get their questions answered to demystify this rather obstruse process.

Finally, we will also be celebrating the journal’s 25^th anniversary during my editorship (Volume 26). I have several ideas to commemorate and celebrate this milestone and look forward to working with the editorial board and past editors on these endeavors.

As previous editor Jordan Soliz noted, I do not view my role as a gatekeeper but a collaborator (Soliz, 2015). I am open to feedback as I believe some of the best ideas come from working together, whether that is working with editorial board members on article ideas and initiatives or working with authors to “make sense” of sometimes contradictory reviews. Please do not ever hesitate to reach out with questions, ideas, or feedback. I am excited for our time together. To learn from one another, uplift one another, and, most importantly, enact change together.