Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down at the end of May, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: Responding to a Reviewer's Concern about an Ado


From   Joerg Luedicke <joerg.luedicke@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Responding to a Reviewer's Concern about an Ado
Date   Thu, 19 May 2011 13:51:32 -0400

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Michael C. Morrison <Morrimic@niacc.edu> wrote:
> A reviewer of a proposed publication of mine is questioning the use of a
> user-written program that I utilized in the analysis. I'm not sure if the
> reviewer is familiar with Stata and ados.
>
> This particular ado is the primary tool utilized in a Sage publication
> regarding the subject at hand (which I will point out to the editor and
> through him to the reviewer.) I'm wondering, how does one find the number of
> downloads of the ado through ssc. I know there are other ways that users can
> obtain ados but I suspect ssc downloads would give me a decent number of
> people using the program. Any other ideas would be appreciated. In advance.
> Thanks.
>

This is ridiculous. What would the reviewer have said if you did all
your analyses in R??? Reject the paper because analyses were carried
out in R? If the program you are using is thoroughly documented
somewhere, then a reference should be enough. You could also offer
sending along the source code so this reviewer can convince himself
that the program is doing what it is supposed to do :) .  As Maarten
already pointed out, the mere number of downloads will probably not
say much.

J.
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index