No Subject

[Carl Huberty]

Why do articles appear in print when study methods, analyses, results, and conclusions are somewhat faulty?  [This may be considered as a follow-up to an earlier edstat interchange.]  My first, and perhaps overly critical, response  is that the editorial practices are faulty.  I don't find Dennis Roberts' "reasons" in his 27 Apr message too satisfying.  I regularly have students write critiques of articles in their respective areas of study.  And I discover many, many, ... errors in reporting.  I often ask myself, WHY?  I can think of two reasons: 1) journal editors can not or do not send manuscripts to reviewers with statistical analysis expertise; and 2) manuscript originators do not regularly seek methodologists as co-authors.  Which is more prevalent?      For whatever it is worth ...   Carl Huberty