<p>Review of manuscript 108-363-1-RV for Interamerican Journal of Psychology. Overall development influences performance on the Trier Social Stress Test for Children</p><p>This manuscript, with a large sample size, has the potential to make a modest contribution to the psychological literature. The author examined the relation between performance on the TSST-C, a stress test for children, and the intelligence and achievement scores of 10 year old Chilean children. The results revealed a relation between cognitive developmental measures and various aspect of performance on the TSST-C, specifically in devising and telling a story and counting backwards by 7s, in a public setting. Those findings are not surprising. It seems likely that children who are more verbally and mathematically proficient would find those stress tasks less challenging. It would be expected that children with higher IQs would tell stories with more ideas and development of the story, as well as organization, unity and coherence. This would not make a major contribution to knowledge. More importantly, there are major problems with the literature review, data analysis, and interpretation of the findings. These would need to be fixed before publication. The most important is that your study is correlational. You are studying the relation between two sets of variables. Therefore, you cannot imply or infer causality. For example, you should not use words like influence, or effect (noun), etc. The nature of your research also implies the kind of data analysis that is appropriate. You used ratings on various scales on the TSST-C as independent variables and intelligence and other developmental variables as dvs. This is illogical. How does stress in a situation affect intelligence (presumed to be a stable trait). You need to do a data analysis that recognizes the correlational data of your data. You could just do a table of correlations (Pearson or Spearman, depending on whether you consider your data to be interval or ordinal). Or you could do a canonical correlation, a correlation between two sets of variables; One set could be all the variables derived from the TSST-C and the other set could include all the standardized test variables. Another possibility is to do regression analyses, using demographic and standardized test variables (such as intelligence) as predictor variables and then the stress test variables as criterion variables. However, even if you use this last method of analysis, you still need to be careful not to interpret your findings as causal. They are correlational, demonstrating relations between variables, nothing more. The entire introduction consists of two paragraphs. I am certain that there is a literature that is related to your research, even if the TSST-C was not used. Your basic question is whether intelligence and academic achievement are related to performance under stress. I think if you broaden your search for literature, you will find relevant articles. Finally, there are some mistakes with respect to APA style. For example, the names of journals should be spelled out, not abbreviated. I will attach an annotated version of your manuscript, with some comments. Overall, my opinion is that the manuscript needs major revisions. Good luck with this. (1) Originality. Unsurprising results, but could make a modest contribution to the literature. (2) Research. If the paper is based upon empirical evidence, does the quantitative or qualitative methodology fit the research question(s). Are the sampling techniques, systematic data collection, and data analysis appropriate for the study? Do the data support the findings? Are findings contextualized in light of previous literature? This is the greatest weakness of this study. The data analysis needs to be completely redone (see comments above). Then the findings need to be appropriately interpreted. (3) Theory. Not relevant. (4) Practice. The implications could be better laid out. For example, results from the TSST-C should not be over-interpreted without recognizing the child’s cognitive development. (5) Literature Review. Inadequate. See comments above. (6) Writing. Check some details of APA style.</p>