Page 1 Share Cite Suggested Citation: The National Academies Press.
Data taken from Bushman et al.
Figure produced by Pete Etchells. To review or not review? In a nutshell, the version of the paper that you see as a final, published article is not the one that was subjected to peer review. According to an anonymous source close to the process, the initial version of the paper went through peer review like any other paper.
Four independent reviews were provided; in one of these, the reviewer pointed out a statistical flaw in the analysis of the data. Despite that, the editorial team at PPMC decided to accept the paper, and invited the authors of the negative review to write a brief reply that would be published alongside the main article.
Remarkably, it appears that once Bushman and colleagues had seen this reply, they submitted a revised version of the manuscript to the editorial board.
The new version, which was unsolicited, attempted to shift the goal posts by making changes to the manuscript to address the critical reply. Standard editorial procedure in such cases would be to reject the unsolicited revision, or at most suspend the entire process while it is sent out for re-review.
But neither of these things happened. Instead the manuscript went through a further three revisions including the addition of a new author, Gollwitzerbefore it was finally accepted for production. Out of the multiple versions of the manuscript that exist, only one — the first — was peer reviewed in a standard way.
Bushman, who is a consulting editor for PPMC, has yet to comment on this bizarre process. In my judgment as editor, the modified analysis did not substantially change the content of the paper or merit an additional round of further review.
The editor gave us permission to conduct a new set of analyses using a different operational definition of consensus.
A defender of PPMC might argue that editors routinely make publishing decisions without further consulting reviewers. But the Bushman paper differs from these routine practices in two ways: What all of this boils down to is rather unsettling.
Not only is it difficult to see what the Bushman study adds apart from controversy and confusion, but also the manner in which the article was handled by the journal highlights a major failure of peer review. Journals undermine the review process at their peril, and the peril of science more widely.Office in Arizona and the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program, a partnership with the Executive address the root causes of truancy, and stop youth’s pro-gression from truancy into more serious later problems such as violence, marital problems, job problems, adult criminality.
Youth violence essay conclusion help Widerrechtliche drohung beispiel essay ahmet erdem dissertation tonicity ap biology essay who should i do my research paper on pagan roots of exist essays about education the man he killed poem essay is the american dream worth pursuing essay m i r medical intl research papers sharepoint master. Program evaluation, however, is the focus of another report commissioned by the Review of the Roots of Youth Violence. The discussion below begins with a review of biosocial theories of crime. It includes a discussion of brain chemistry, neurophysiological conditions, genetics and evolutionary factors that account for violent human behaviour. Another paper about protective equipment at the high school level found that among players enrolled during the football seasons, some (9%) sustained a total of concussions. That study notes that, regardless of the type and brand of protective equipment, incidence of concussion remains the same — suggesting that it is the nature of on-field play that remains at issue.
This issue is subject to a detailed discussion in another report commissioned by the Review of the Roots of Youth Violence.
In sum, as with biosocial theories of crime causation, psychological theories focus on the identification and treatment of individual traits that may predispose people to violent behaviour.
incidents involving firearms have contributed to the view that youth violence has reached The goal of this paper is to critically review the empirical evidence and theories that have emerged to document and explain ethnic, racial, and class differences in the rate of adolescent involvement in it does collect data and research studies.
Empirical research on firearms and violence has resulted in important findings that can inform policy decisions. In particular, a wealth of descriptive information exists about the prevalence of firearm-related injuries and deaths, about firearms markets, and about the .
The Symposium event itself, which was held over two days in March of , brought together researchers, policy makers, government officials, service providers, and consumers from across the country to discuss the research papers and directions for future research related to homelessness.
Thus, one of the first things that we must do to help youth be safe is combat the culture of meanness and cruelty that is at the root of bullying, peer violence, and abuse. Bullying is a systems problem and many well-intended people don’t realize the complexity of the issue.