Peer Review Quick Guide
***
Common MistakesPrevious MistakeNext MistakePrint This PageExit
***
***
Test Your Knowledge tabReporting Statistical Significance tab
 
Sample Paper Excerpt
A reviewer is perusing a manuscript that reports a regression coefficient (.00014) that gives the effect of dollars spent per citizen (in the state of Illinois) on the percent reduction in cases of West Nile Virus, and reports as well that the p-value is less than .001. The author, on the basis of this information, concludes that spending influences the incidence rates of the disease. The reviewer feels this is insufficient evidence to support the study's conclusion.

A reviewer is perusing a manuscript that reports a regression coefficient (.00014) that gives the effect of dollars spent per citizen (in the state of Illinois) on the percent reduction in cases of West Nile Virus, and reports as well that the p-value is less than .001. The author, on the basis of this information, concludes that spending influences the incidence rates of the disease.

An author reports:

"...a regression coefficient (.00014) that gives the effect of dollars spent per citizen (in the state of Illinois) on the percent reduction in cases of a vector-borne disease, and reports as well that the p-value is less than .001."

The reviewer remains unconvinced of the author's conclusion that spending influences the incidence rates of the disease based on the presented data.
 
What additional statistics should the author include to make his case more compelling?





 
Proceed to the Next Mistake
 
***
Finished? View Performance Report


***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***Developed 2006 by the Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center, Northern Illinois University.