Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Editors’ Comment: A Few Guidelines for Quantitative Submissions

Editors’ Comment: A Few Guidelines for Quantitative Submissions 806282 ASRXXX10.1177/0003122418806282American Sociological ReviewLizardo et al. American Sociological Review 2018, Vol. 83(6) 1281 –1283 editors’ Comment: © American Sociological Association 2018 DOI: 10.1177/0003122418806282 a Few guidelines for https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418806282 journals.sagepub.com/home/asr Quantitative submissions a b sarah a. Mustillo, Omar a. lizardo, and rory M. McVeigh In the three years we have been editing ASR, We will not take a stand in this debate we have been impressed with the method- except to say that, in general, p < .10 and one- ological breadth and depth of the submissions tailed tests should only be used in rare, excep- to the journal. Among the subset of papers tional circumstances with proper justification. that use primarily quantitative analytic strate- Many papers attempt to justify use of p < .10 gies, an equally impressive range of methods standards by pointing to “directionality” in and techniques is on display. The field has their verbally stated hypotheses. Others use come a long way since any of the three of us vague language of p < .10 indicating “border- were in graduate school and, indeed, many of line” or “suggestive” findings. We do not find the articles we have published in our role as the first rationale compelling. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Sociological Review SAGE

Editors’ Comment: A Few Guidelines for Quantitative Submissions

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/editors-comment-a-few-guidelines-for-quantitative-submissions-Dc0Fput3Ck

References (11)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© American Sociological Association 2018
ISSN
0003-1224
eISSN
1939-8271
DOI
10.1177/0003122418806282
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

806282 ASRXXX10.1177/0003122418806282American Sociological ReviewLizardo et al. American Sociological Review 2018, Vol. 83(6) 1281 –1283 editors’ Comment: © American Sociological Association 2018 DOI: 10.1177/0003122418806282 a Few guidelines for https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418806282 journals.sagepub.com/home/asr Quantitative submissions a b sarah a. Mustillo, Omar a. lizardo, and rory M. McVeigh In the three years we have been editing ASR, We will not take a stand in this debate we have been impressed with the method- except to say that, in general, p < .10 and one- ological breadth and depth of the submissions tailed tests should only be used in rare, excep- to the journal. Among the subset of papers tional circumstances with proper justification. that use primarily quantitative analytic strate- Many papers attempt to justify use of p < .10 gies, an equally impressive range of methods standards by pointing to “directionality” in and techniques is on display. The field has their verbally stated hypotheses. Others use come a long way since any of the three of us vague language of p < .10 indicating “border- were in graduate school and, indeed, many of line” or “suggestive” findings. We do not find the articles we have published in our role as the first rationale compelling.

Journal

American Sociological ReviewSAGE

Published: Dec 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.