Editorial: What Makes for a Great Applications and Case Studies Paper?

Abstract

One of the most common reasons a submission to JASA Applications and Case Studies is rejected is that it is deemed inappropriate for this section of the journal. If we look for guidance in the journal’s instructions for authors, the opening sentence of the section on Applications and Case Studies states, “The Applications and Case Studies section publishes original articles that cogently demonstrate statistical usage in applications from any research area.” In contrast, the instructions for Theory and Methods papers say, “The research reported should be motivated by a scientific or practical problem and, ideally, illustrated by application of the proposed methodology to that problem. Illustration of techniques with real data is especially welcomed and strongly encouraged.” Many potential authors may find the distinctions between these two statements difficult to discern, which perhaps partly explains the high frequency of submissions rejected for being inappropriate. This editorial is an attempt to clarify what I think these distinctions are. In particular, in what ways is a paper with new methodology motivated by a “scientific or practical problem” and illustrated with “real data” not necessarily appropriate for Applications and Case Studies? First, let me be clear that the views expressed here are my own and are not part of official journal policy. Every editor is the final arbiter of what papers should be published in the journal and I think it is appropriate and even desirable that different editors use somewhat different criteria in making these decisions. Nevertheless, it is my hope that authors, referees, associate editors, and future editors will find it helpful for me to spell out in greater detail than is appropriate for a journal’s website some of the things I look for when evaluating a submission. There is not and should not be a clear and wide dividing line between Applications and Case Studies papers and Theory and Methods papers. Nevertheless, the use of the word “illustration” in the instructions for Theory and Methods papers points at a key distinction. An illustrative example possesses a feature that a proposed methodology is meant to address. The resulting data analysis may be rather brief, focusing on how the methodology can handle this feature better than previously proposed methods. The example thus serves in a supporting role, with the novel methodology and possibly accompanying theory being the main research contributions. In contrast, the specific application plays a much more prominent role in an Applications and Case Studies paper. A typical Applications and Case Studies paper begins with a description of the applied problem, generally one of current scientific or policy interest, which then leads into a discussion of the proposed methodology. Note that while most Applications and Case Studies papers include novel methodology, that is not a requirement for publication. For example, a paper that adapts existing methodology to a new field of application may be publishable if this adaptation leads to substantial scientific insights in the application beyond what could be learned from previously used methods. Indeed, a good Applications and Case Studies paper might provide thoughtful analyses of real data to demonstrate the strengths and/or weaknesses of various statistical methods presently used to address an important substantive problem. All data analyses appearing in Applications and Case Studies should correspond to good statistical and scientific practice. Statisticians and other researchers using statistical methods should be able to look to papers in Applications and Case Studies as examples of statistical practice they can emulate. Here are some of the features of an application or case study that should generally appear in any Applications and Case Studies paper: