Clinical Reviews For Authors of New Books In Progress
Authors and Contributors
In an effort to support field and theory congruency, The Association offers the availability to review clinical/professional manuscripts to check accuracy of various theories, methods, or references to Institute studies. And, to potentially provide Forewords.
As more clinical books emerge in this genre, it helps our field grow in theory recognition having evidence-basis as a relational abuse theory, within the Traumatic Stress Studies field.
Books of Interest:
We do not read, offer to clinically review theory, offer Forewords or Postscripts, literary reviews, or ‘advance praise’ comments for books that are not written by clinical professionals.
1. Clinical Market Book: The book must be written for the clinical market.
i. We have had numerous books submitted by clinicians that contain some psychology-based information on personality disorders, trauma, and personality science related to this genre, however, the tonality of the book, reveals it is written for the survivor readership and market. Having psychology information in a book does not make the book a book primarily for therapists.
ii. With that in mind, many authors try to write for ‘dual’ markets—hoping their book appeals to both survivors and therapists. As a warning, most of these books would be considered for the survivor market, as most writers use language and approach, oriented to the survivor reader, and not to the clinician. It is wiser not to try to appeal to both markets.
iii. Books that are written by survivor-therapists and that contain their own story, should only be briefly alluded to in the Introduction, written in 2nd or 3rd person, and is conveyed for reader ‘relatability,’ and not as a detailed memoir. Detailed memoir is part of the survivor market. The rest of the book should be clinical/recovery-oriented in nature, and theory-oriented.
iv. Books that use non-professional language linguistically (flying monkeys, gray and yellow rocks) are not clinical market books.
v. Books that are predominantly spiritual/religious in nature, or are analogies of other survivors experiences, are not appropriate for a clinical review.
2. Theory Congruency
i. Books should convey theory-relatedness to what is currently recognized as theoretical underpinnings such as: relational dynamics, trauma, atypical trauma/cognitive dissonance, survivor personality and profile, and treatment/recovery methods.
ii. The survivor population as a primarily trauma population, methodologies should encompass trauma treatment as a primary method with other methodologies as adjunctive.
iii. Writers should be familiar with the current information on contraindications with this population.
i. Clinical books are expected to have a wide range of clinical citations related to material contained in the book, including but not limited to domestic violence and differentiations from pathological relationships, the psychopathology of the partner/personality disorders/co-morbidity factors, relational dynamics, resulting trauma, atypical trauma/cognitive dissonance, treatment methods, and/or the survivor personality/profile.
ii. Citations should have an evidence-base and be trauma-informed.
iii. Quotes from survivor-written books should not be used as clinical citations.
What is a Clinical/Theory Review?
A member of The Association board (based on availability) reads the manuscript. Utilizing the editing feature in Word, the member leaves comments for consideration about the use of current theory and methodology related to this counseling genre for authors who wish to be conscientious in applying current theory and data.
In instances where theoretical explanations exceed room in the editing feature, a separate document is created similar to a report that allows room for an expanded explanation of theory or methodology.
Each manuscript theory review differs depending on the extensiveness of that theory or methods that need to be addressed. The report (if created) and the manuscript with comments are sent back to the author.
The review does not include book editing or proofreading for grammar, etc. Nor does it include developmental edits (when chapters or content should be put in a different order for flow).
Self-published authors should hire both forms of editors (general editing and developmental editing) and the book should be in, or beyond, final edits when sent to us. Manuscripts should be free of strike-throughs, red lines, or highlighted content for removal or reorienting to another section of the book.
Reviews are time-intensive on our part, related to reading the manuscript, making comments in the editing feature, and writing a theory report if warranted. Time invested in your manuscript can range from hours to a day, or more.
Reviews, Advance Praise, Jacket Quotes
All requests for any type of comment, review, or quote are approached through the same process. The book is still reviewed for theory congruency before The Assn, or any board member, provides a quote, recommendation, or review, utilizing The Assn’s name or their name.
Using The Institute’s and/or Association’s Work for Quotes in Your Book
Even without an Assn review of your book, authors should be conscious of how other’s work whether theory, graphics, or text, should be handled. Plagiarism comes in several forms, from simply ‘rewording’ concepts without credit or citation, to utilizing graphics and/or text that exceeds the word limit generally provided as a ‘quote.’ These are not the only examples of plagiarism, so authors should refresh their understanding of those, and other violating forms, related to intellectual property usage. For instance, The Institute utilizes copyright infringement software, and sometimes authors are surprised to get a written infringement notification generated from the software that detected uses of concept and theory and other materials, unattributed or uncited.
For those having us review your manuscript, we will flag content that is recognized, and suggest you quote and/or cite. However, it is important that you become familiar with where theory concepts have originated in this field, so you can appropriately cite originating sources. Authors should not rely on other books that may have plagiarized, or not cited, the correct originating source. Less integrity-oriented authors have widely used concepts in their books that are part of the field’s theory, without attribution, making quoting from these sources unreliable.
Implications of Acceptance to Review
To consider a review, we require in advance a one-page description of the book noting some of the theory topics you will cover. We also require a citation list of items you will be citing or quoting to determine whether to review or not.
If the book is accepted to review, the most simple implication is that The Assn:
(a) is willing to review for theory congruency,
(b) has an initial interest in the potentiality of the book as a referred book by The Assn, or
(c) may offer a Foreword, PostScript, jacket quote, or ‘advance praise’ for the book if it is found to be a good clinical ‘fit,’ and is desired by the author.
Suggestions made on theory corrections are at the discretion of the author for inclusion. Theory corrections do influence The Assn’s determination as to the ‘clinical fit’ for referred books.
Non-Implications of Acceptance to Reviews
Reviews do not imply :
(a) automatic commitment to the book as a referred book,
(b) automatic commitment for a Foreword or PostScript, or
(c) automatic commitment for a book jacket review or ‘advance praise’ comment,
Books that are accepted for review:
(a) Should be in final edit stages (see above)
(b) Books up to 250 pages of text, excluding citation pages, is $400.
(c) Books that are 251-350 pages of text, excluding citation pages, is $475
(d) Books over 350 pages will be discussed with the author
(e) Fees are paid before review work begins on the manuscript
Turnaround time varies, depending on Board member schedules. Estimation is 1-3 weeks.
Please email us at survivortreatment (@) gmail (dot) com, about availability.