I suspect that it will vary by field -- perhaps this is normal for psychology, but looking at recent accepted papers from the same journal, they mostly had 60-7

I suspect that it will vary by field -- perhaps this is normal for psychology, but looking at recent accepted papers from the same journal, they mostly had 60-70 citations. Such a dramatic deviation from the "norms" of the venue is at least a yellow flag, but I would hesitate to say that it's necessarily a red one. In CS research, this many references in a peer-reviewed work would be a red flag for me, however. If it were an NSF grant proposal, then it would actually be fairly few -- for whatever reason grant proposals might have 300+. So, the context is very important when evaluating citation prevalence.