Peer review is a core component of scientific practice. Although peer review ideally improves research and promotes rigor, it also has consequences for what types of research are published and cited and who wants to (and is able to) advance in research-focused careers. Despite these consequences, few reviewers or editors receive training or oversight to ensure their feedback is helpful, professional, and culturally sensitive. Here, we critically examine the peer-review system in psychology and neuroscience at multiple levels, from ideas to institutions, interactions, and individuals. We highlight initiatives that aim to change the normative negativity of peer review and provide authors with constructive, actionable feedback that is sensitive to diverse identities, methods, topics, and environments. We conclude with a call to action for how individuals, groups, and organizations can improve the culture of peer review. We provide examples of how changes in the peer-review system can be made with an eye to diversity (increasing the range of identities and experiences constituting the field), equity (fair processes and outcomes across groups), and inclusion (experiences that promote belonging across groups). These changes can improve scientists' experience of peer review, promote diverse perspectives and identities, and enhance the quality and impact of science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

BACKGROUND: Youth violence, victimization, and bullying are pervasive in schools across the United States and are detrimental for learning and healthy development. K‐12 school safety is an increasingly urgent issue to research and understand from multiple perspectives. Physical and psychological safety in school is linked to better student and school outcomes and is fundamental to fostering well‐being and prosocial behavior.METHODS: Despite research demonstrating positive outcomes associated with school safety, there is no comprehensive conceptual model in the literature that considers precursors, strategies, mechanisms, and outcomes of school safety together. The current paper presents an equity‐centered comprehensive model of school safety, which is intended as a holistic representation of the multiple factors and pathways that contribute to school safety and positive youth development.RESULTS: This model can guide research and practice through an equity‐centered and comprehensive approach. This model can enable practitioners, researchers, and policymakers to make informed decisions and reach consensus regarding planning and decisions related to reducing violence and establishing supportive school environments.CONCLUSION: Our model suggests that a comprehensive approach can ensure the safety and well‐being of students and staff. By thinking ecologically, schools, communities, and stakeholders can ensure that all aspects of the school context are included in school safety.

The prevalence of teacher-directed violence has been well-documented around the world. However, interventions focused on the prevention of teacher victimization have received less attention. Understanding how to reduce teacher-directed violence is vital to preserving the overall well-being of teachers, supporting their teaching, reducing teacher burnout, and providing recommendations for future research. The current scoping review reports on teacher-directed violence interventions in K–12 school settings (n = 2). In addition, emerging evidence is described that provides recommendations for developing teacher-directed violence interventions (n = 6). The results from this scoping review reinforce the need for further study of teacher victimization-focused interventions to support the essential work of teachers.

Peer review is a core component of scientific practice. Although peer review ideally improves research and promotes rigor, it also has consequences for what types of research are published and cited, and who wants to (and is able to) advance in research-focused careers. Despite these consequences, few reviewers or editors receive training or oversight to ensure their feedback is helpful, professional, and culturally sensitive. Here, we critically examine the peer review system in psychology and neuroscience at multiple levels, from ideas to institutions, interactions, and individuals. We highlight initiatives that aim to change the normative negativity of peer review and provide authors with constructive, actionable feedback that is sensitive to diverse identities, methods, topics, and environments. We conclude with a call to action for how individuals, groups, and organizations can improve the culture of peer review. We provide examples of how changes in the peer review system can be made with an eye to diversity (increasing the range of identities and experiences constituting the field), equity (fair processes and outcomes across groups), and inclusion (experiences that promote belonging across groups). These changes can improve scientists’ experience of peer review, promote diverse perspectives and identities, and enhance the quality and impact of science.

Background: Following school shootings, threats of violence often surge, straining law enforcement and disrupting school operations. Some agencies respond with “shaming” tactics, such as publicizing arrests, but research shows these methods can worsen outcomes by increasing fear and alienation among students.Contributions to Practice: This commentary advocates for moving away from punitive measures like shaming and instead recommends restorative practices focused on relationship‐building and accountability. These strategies foster a positive school climate, improve trust, and engage students in creating safer environments.Implications for School Health Policy, Practice, and Equity: We emphasize the limitations of shaming and the need for developmentally appropriate juvenile justice responses. A comprehensive approach to school safety should include social–emotional learning, early threat detection, and environmental design. Policies should prioritize positive youth development to ensure equitable practices, particularly for marginalized students affected by punitive measures.Conclusions: A holistic, evidence‐based approach that incorporates restorative practices and proactive safety strategies is more effective in fostering a supportive, safe school environment. Moving away from shaming and punishment will enhance student well‐being, reduce fear, and promote a more inclusive school climate for all students.