In a multi-study paper, if one of the studies is a reanalysis of an already published study for a novel purpose (done by one of the co-authors), would you describe the method in full, as you would for new exps', or just briefly summarize with reference to the published article?
-
Show this thread
-
I can't find any explicit guidelines about this. What do you think
@tdverstynen@o_guest@cMadan@ceptional@IrisVanRooij?1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Replying to @tdverstynen @o_guest and
That was my thinking as well, but I've seen a few articles that instead summarize methods, and was wondering what, if any, is the official or recommended policy
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tdverstynen @o_guest and
There's nothing in the submission guidelines. I might just contact the editor to make sure what they prefer
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @venpopov @tdverstynen and
Sometimes you're limited in space and must refer the reader, but yeah, ideally I'd go over the previous one but I'd do it slightly more briefly than not, especially since I'd want to defer to/people to read the original authors if that makes sense.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
I agree with your sentiment. That said, we submitted a paper analysing existing data with a shortened method section, but received feedback from reviewers that they needed more (practically full) details to understand metods and how those affected interpretation of results.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.