title: Survey of editors and reviewers of high-impact psychology journals: statistical and research design problems in submitted manuscripts.
abstract: The authors surveyed 21 editors and reviewers from major psychology journals to identify and describe the statistical and design errors they encounter most often and to get their advice regarding prevention of these problems. Content analysis of the text responses revealed themes in 3 major areas: (a) problems with research design and reporting (e.g., lack of an a priori power analysis, lack of congruence between research questions and study design/analysis, failure to adequately describe statistical procedures); (b) inappropriate data analysis (e.g., improper use of analysis of variance, too many statistical tests without adjustments, inadequate strategy for addressing missing data); and (c) misinterpretation of results. If researchers attended to these common methodological and analytic issues, the scientific quality of manuscripts submitted to high-impact psychology journals might be significantly improved.
authors.affiliation: Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Center for Health Care Evaluation, Willow Road (MPD-152), Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA. alexander.harris2@va.gov
authors.forename: Alex
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Harris
authors.forename: Rachelle
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Reeder
authors.forename: Jenny
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Hyun
mesh_terms: D003625:Data Collection; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D035081:Editorial Policies; D006801:Humans; D055811:Journal Impact Factor; D008373:Manuscripts as Topic; D017712:Peer Review, Research; D010506:Periodicals as Topic; D011584:Psychology; D011786:Quality Control; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*