On Wednesday night at the recent APsaA Winter Meeting, there was a huge turnout at the Harvard Club for a party for Arnold Richards, in honor of his 10-year term as the editor of JAPA. Many spoke in praise of Richards' scientific, administrative, organizational, artistic, creative, and stylistic contributions to JAPA. Steven Levy, incoming editor, served as MC for the evening. I conducted brief interviews with each of them to give our TAP readers a sense of what Richards has accomplished and what our new editor has in mind for the future.
LJ: What would you like our members to know about your proudest accomplishments with JAPA and your greatest frustrations?
AR: I have to start with TAP really, because I believe my work with TAP is one reason I was selected to be JAPA editor. When I took over the newsletter it really didn't even have a name, so I held a contest to name it and Helen Fischer won. That's how it became The American Psychoanalyst or TAP. It became more than just a house organ. I have in mind the depth interviews with prominent figures in psychoanalysis and the historical accounts of almost every society in APsaA.
When I came to JAPA, I had it redesigned with the four-season covers and paid a lot of attention to design and format to make it friendlier to readers. I broadened JAPA's breadth and reach, adding more editorial associates, more outside reviewers, and bringing greater diversity to the review process and to the submissions. I wanted the journal to be more appealing to readers outside the APsaA, in order to expand its educational reach.
LJ: I understand you brought the idea of a theme to the journal.
AR: Yes. I felt that if a journal is just a repository of papers, it comes via the mail and goes to the shelf, but if each journal has a theme, people read it in a different way. Papers benefit from the company they keep, and with a theme the journal becomes a reference for issues like female sexuality, child development, and so forth.
Steven Levy, left, incoming editor of JAPA with outgoing editor Arnold Richards.
LJ: Didn't you also change the production of the journal?
AR: Yes. When I began, JAPA was produced by the International Universities Press (IUP), and we got a payment of about $150,000 a year. I proposed we own the journal; we collect the revenues and pay for publishing services. We made that change seven years ago, and since then have been earning around $270,000 a year. So far, we've increased the revenues to APsaA by nearly a million dollars. Also, under this model the editor has more control over the quality of the journal.
LJ: About how many papers does the journal review and how many are accepted?
AR: I would say we average about 140 submissions a year, and we accept about 35 or 20 to 30 percent. When you add up papers, panel reports, book reviews, and commentaries, in 10 years we've probably published close to a thousand contributions; but the number of people involved is more than a thousand, so this involves a very large community. Each paper has three reviewers and the majority rules. The editor doesn't override the reviewers, the reviewers take a lot of pains to give meaningful feedback, and authors are very appreciative of the reviews. My greatest satisfaction is when grateful authors write to thank me for all the useful feedback we've given them, and their papers were rejected!
LJ: Now you must have some free time and I imagine you already have plans for it.
AR: I'm involved in organizing the Internet Press for Psychoanalysis sponsored by JAPA, Contemporary Psychoanalysis, and the Psychoanalytic Connection. Our first “publication” was the Dream Interpreters by Howard Shevrin, which has been released in soft cover by IUP. Our second is the selected unpublished papers of Jack Arlow, which can be accessed on: . I hope to develop this medium so that many of our members will be able to publish papers that would not otherwise find their way into a book because publishers are publishing fewer psychoanalytic titles. I also plan to write a history of psychoanalysis and APsaA.
LJ: This organization owes you a great debt of gratitude, and I appreciate your taking the time to let our readers know more about you and your contributions to JAPA.
LJ: I suspect many of our members may know you from your writings and your organizational contributions, but for those who don't know you, tell us about yourself and about how an editor is selected.
SL: I do full-time academic work at a university and a medical school, where I have major administrative responsibilities. Because
Lee Jaffe, Ph.D., is senior faculty at the San Diego Psychoanalytic Institute, a past editorial associate for JAPA, and a member of the editorial staff of TAP.
JAPA, under the inspired leadership of my predecessor, Arnie Richards, has become much more complex and demanding of the editor, I believe my experience at Emory will prove very useful. Also, my scholarly work represents mainstream North American psychoanalytic ideas deeply rooted in traditional psychoanalytic perspectives, which is a solid foundation for considering interesting, novel ideas.
As to the selection of the editor, the choice is made by a committee of the membership heavily weighted with people who have experience in editing at JAPA and other leading journals, along with people who are actively involved in scholarly life. Applicants usually have some experience with JAPA, they write essays, and undergo a series of interviews. It's a rigorous process that for me was fun, challenging, and obviously I'm pleased with the outcome.
Every second issue will contain a new empirical research section, and we will have a new section on psychoanalytic education.
LJ: I imagine you have a vision for JAPA's future. What can our readers expect?
SL: Following Arnie Richard's lead, a major continuing direction for JAPA is one of inclusiveness and trying to come to grips with the challenges of theoretical and clinical pluralism. Many analysts look for coordination and commonality of theoretical perspectives, and just as many others feel our field grows more vibrant if it is unencumbered by the need for such coordination. I see it as the editor's job to try to strike a balance between these positions.
We will pursue new Internet, Web-based techniques that will allow readers to dialog with writers. There will be a commentary section and expanded letters section that will allow our readers more opportunities to discuss the varied contributions to JAPA. Also, every second issue will contain a new empirical research section, and we will have a section on psychoanalytic education. The plan is to increase JAPA's role in the scientific dialogue about psychoanalytic research and education, two areas of great concern for the future of our field as psychoanalysis moves toward being an independent profession rather than a subspecialty of other professions.
LJ: Do you see JAPA having a role in various debates going on within APsaA, like questions about certification and eligibility requirements?
SL: That's an interesting and difficult question. There has always been an intellectual firewall between the politics of APsaA and the scholarly activities of JAPA, even though JAPA is owned by the organization. Arnie Richards, despite his own interests and proclivities, carefully shielded JAPA from political, organizational matters for 10 years. Interestingly, he ended his term with a JAPA supplement specifically devoted to the politics of psychoanalysis, so it will be important to see how the organization takes up the issues raised in that supplement. I intend to be cautious like my predecessor, and make certain JAPA remains a rigorous, scientific journal.
LJ: Is there anything else you wish to say to our readers?
SL: I would like everyone to see JAPA as welcoming, so more and more of our members will continue to get involved as reviewers and writers. We hope the new Internet activities will increase participation, and I would like people to feel free to call me if they wish to get involved.
LJ: Steve, I want to congratulate you on becoming our new editor and wish you the best. Thanks for talking with us today.