Constructive Criticism




Sample Paper Excerpt
A peer reviewer is perusing a submission that details a study with the objective of examining the superiority of the newly developed instrument to measure a general mental health of a person. The author, a graduate student submitting her first manuscript, designed the study with 20 healthy volunteers, 1) each one used the standard Medical Outcome Study (MOS) mental health scale soon after they entered the study and 2) after 3 months they used the newly developed instrument to measure the response. The data consisted of pre (MOS scale) and post (new instrument) study results on 20 subjects. The author decided to test whether the mean post-study result is better than the mean pre-study result using a standard 'pooled' t-test. The peer reviewer, who has a substantial background in statistics, disagrees with the selection of the standard 'pooled' t-test. The reviewer comments that had the author invested in a basic statistic text and bothered to read it, he would have selected this test instead of wasting the reviewer's time.

Has the reviewer provided useful information to the author?
Yes, the reviewer's comment provide useful information on how to address the problem. No, the reviewer's comment did not provide useful information on how to address the problem.

Proceed to the


Finished?