« Guns and Freedom, Pictures and Words | Main | Charting Pop Songs »

29 February 2008


Katie Porter

How about the "rule" of the Yale Law Journal: "For empirical work, please upload all materials needed to replicate your results (including computer programs and data sets)."

First, exactly why and how would I send them an entire computer program? I'm supposed to get them a Stata license? Second, this presumes that human subjects restrictions wouldn't bar such disclosure or at least require approval. If they are able, I think replication by editors is always a good thing, but it seems ridiculous to require this at the submission stage rather than the editing stage.

Joe Doherty

I don't think the 5 table/graph/chart rule is onerous. Like the prospect of being hanged, it concentrates an article wonderfully.

Christopher Zorn

The figures/graphics rule seems especially bad. Then again, it seems like the two contradict each other a bit -- is (e.g.) a scatterplot an "...or graphics" (and therefore banned) or an "author-created chart, graph, or table"?

And while we're on the subject of annoying law-review submission-season practices: What's up with ExpressO not accepting PDFs? For all of us out there using LaTeX, that's a huge hassle.

The comments to this entry are closed.


November 2015

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

Site Meter

Creative Commons License

  • Creative Commons License
Blog powered by Typepad