From the Editor

• Published date: 01 February 2015
• Date: 01 February 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12161
• Author: R. Kelly Raley

R. K R University of Texas–Austin

From the Editor

This issue, Volume 77, number 1, continues

the tradition of a mid-decade issue devoted

to theory and method. A counterpoint to the

Decade in Review issue published in years

ending in zero, the mid-decade special issue

on theory and method looks forward by high-

lighting new approaches that might be applied

to advance knowledge about families. Similar

to previous editions of the special issue on

theory and method, this one includes both

invited manuscripts and spontaneous contri-

butions. Also reprising one novel aspect of

Alexis Walker’s special issue, I have included a

paper by Goldberg and Allen on how to prepare

manuscripts for JMF. I hope this is as useful

to qualitative researchers (and reviewers) as

White’s 2005 article “Writes of Passage” was

to quantitative researchers. We don’t want to be

overly rigid in our guidelines, but having some

agreed-upon standards should help ensure that

inappropriate ones are not applied.

The remaining articles herein cover many

aspects of research, ranging from theory and

conceptualization to measurement and model-

ing. A strong manuscript motivates its empiri-

cal analysis by identifying important open ques-

tions about how family relationships work. This

requires both a good grasp of prior research and

an ability to locate untested assumptions embed-

ded in existing theory. Theoretical frameworks

help organize ideas so that the assumptions

and open questions become easier to nd. For

example, the theoretical framework presented

by LeBlanc, Frost, and Wight describes a pro-

cess by which individual-level and couple-level

minority stressors lead to poorer health out-

comes. This work integrates and extends existing

frameworks and generates many open questions

to be answered in future research.

Other manuscripts focus more on advancing

empirical analyses through better data collec-

tion, measurement, and modeling. Importantly,

good measurement and modeling require strong

conceptualization. Some of the innovations pre-

sented here have the promise to push analysts to

think more carefully about theory. For example

Gordon describes how the application of Item

Response Theory can improve measurement

precision. Yet, new tools for measurement often

enable (and even require) researchers to rene

their conceptualization. Similarly, Repetti and

colleagues note that the large amount of data

collected through naturalistic methods serves as

“both a blessing and a curse for family scholars”

and demands that scholars “keep theory promi-

nent.” The marginal structural models described

by Bacak and Kennedy force researchers to

think carefully about the difference between

confounding and mediating variables. Throw-

ing every possible variable into the analysis

without considering how it affects interpretation

is not a recipe for good science, which is one

reason why JMF has a tradition of requiring

researchers to justify all variables in the analysis

in the background section.

Finally, some topics of research are espe-

cially well positioned to move the eld forward.

The emergence of same-sex marriage presents

amazing opportunities for understanding how

marriage affects well-being and how gender

and sexuality shape marriages. Done well,

cross-national research can extend our knowl-

edge about how macro contexts condition family

processes.

Thank you to all of the reviewers who pro-

vided exceptional feedback and constructive

criticism to the authors of these manuscripts and

especially to the members of the Editorial Board,

Journal of Marriage and Family 77 (February 2015): 1–2 1

DOI:10.1111/jomf.12161