Um, but how have you gone about doing this?

Yeah.

So there are a couple of pieces to this.

Uh, so I'm gonna first just talk about how to sort of increase the visibility.

I'll, I'll leave impact factor out of it, which is a sort of a different animal.

So I think in part it has to do a lot with perspective taking.

I think if we reflect on what it's like to be an author submitting to a journal and how you'd like to be treated, I think as editors we need to always think about that, right? And so I do think that part of the success is actually just good old public relations, making sure...

Um, for people who are listening and want to become more involved as an, as a reviewer or maybe even an associate editor, what do you suggest that they do?

With these terms in mind, I'm curious to hear you talk about the problems with ecological validity as a construct in contemporary neuropsychology and what you recommend instead.

Yeah, you know, I think the term ecological validity first emerged when people realized that our measures of executive functioning kind of get at that inhibition, problem solving, maintenance of behavior level level.

But don't get at that higher level I talked about earlier where you need to incorporate insight and perspective memory and sort of monitoring at a meta level.

So this higher level does not typically get assessed by our tests.

Right.

So if you perform poorly on our typical measures that get more straightforwardly at, say, inhibition, like the Stroop test or some variants of that, then once you have problems at that level, you're not going to be successful at that meta level, that higher level.

But if you perform well on our traditional tests.

But for now, tell us about tests of executive functioning and other traditional tools in terms of their ability to reveal patients' everyday functioning.