Year: 2008
Type: editorial
Abstract: Our Vision for Autism ResearchOne dilemma facing all researchers is the choice of where to submit their next paper.The scientific content of a Journal, its readership, impact factor, the speed of publication and how editors dealt with previous submissions are some of the factors that authors consider when choosing a venue for their manuscript.In launching a new publication, editors should convey to potential authors the essence of a Journal in order to attract those papers that will establish its future character.In introducing this second issue we articulate some of the editorial considerations underlying publication priorities.Autism Research was established by the International Society for Autism Research (INSAR) to satisfy the pressing need for a publication outlet for high quality papers dealing with the full range of basic and behavioural sciences that underlie research into autism spectrum disorders.The Journal is also an important vehicle for INSAR, whose aim is to advance autism research.The Editors recognize that these goals are well served by publishing both positive and negative findings.Exciting new findings, especially from hypothesis driven research, are the bread and butter of scientific journals, and they are sought for this journal as well.Nevertheless, research into autism is also marked by intriguing findings that have been neither replicated nor refuted, either because replication has never been attempted or because a failure to replicate has not been published.Consequently, in order to support new hypotheses or new data, authors may refer to unreplicated findings, which may simply be false positives.Scientific advance in part requires identifying those hypotheses that are not supported by empirical data and on the publication of definitive negative studies.There is usually a bias against the publication of negative findings in research.The field of autism research is one with a large, potentially vulnerable lay audience that actively follows research.Therefore, the Editors consider it important to publish both replications and nonreplications to foster the ultimate emergence of a balanced picture.At times, the pressure to report positive findings in the face of nonsignificant results from primary analyses may lead authors to perform ad hoc analyses to support an auxiliary hypothesis.Thus, a hypothesis that is refuted in the main finds support in a subgroup of data.Determining scientific merit in such cases can be difficult for
Source: Autism Research
DOI: 10.1002/aur.18
Language: English
Subfield: History and Philosophy of Science
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2062598052