Five commandments for APA
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 18922119 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nora S Newcombe (0000-0002-7044-6046, Temple University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2002 |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 202-205 |
| Publication date | 2002-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Psychologist (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0003-066X • E-ISSN: 1935-990X |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1037//0003-066x.57.3.202 |
| PMID | 11905120 |
| OpenAlex | W2087858501 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 2 |
The author delineates 5 rules of scientific review and publishing and argues that these norms need to be upheld even when to do so proves politically difficult. The 5 rules are: (a) Scientific articles should be judged only by their logic and the strength of their evidence; (b) the results of a competent peer review should be accepted; (c) disagreements with scientific articles should be aired in peer reviewed commentaries; (d) efforts to judge scientific articles on the basis of political concerns should be resisted; and (e) the explicit rules and normative expectations of peer review should not be arbitrarily altered
Epistemology · Normative · Political science · Politics · Publishing · Scientific consensus · Scientific evidence · Cognitive Abilities and Testing · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Law · Philosophy · Psychological Testing and Assessment · Psychology · Social Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.08 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2002 - 2006 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |