Behind the Seen Anyone who has submitted a manuscript to the American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology (AJSLP) knows that revisions go on behind the scene. What is “seen” in the published pages of the journal is often quite different from what the editorial staff encounters when reading the original manuscript. One area ... Editorial
Editorial  |   November 01, 2006
Behind the Seen
 
Author Notes
  • Jeannette D. HoitEditor
Article Information
Editorial
Editorial   |   November 01, 2006
Behind the Seen
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, November 2006, Vol. 15, 305. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2006/028)
 
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, November 2006, Vol. 15, 305. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2006/028)
Anyone who has submitted a manuscript to the American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology (AJSLP) knows that revisions go on behind the scene. What is “seen” in the published pages of the journal is often quite different from what the editorial staff encounters when reading the original manuscript. One area that often receives attention relates to statistical treatment of data and how it is reported.
Use of alpha and the reporting of significance levels seem to be particularly problematic issues. More often than not (or at least it seems that way), the Method section of a manuscript contains no mention of the alpha level that was used for statistical testing. Although .05 may be the most frequently used alpha, it cannot be assumed that this was the alpha used unless it is explicitly stated.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access