Research articles published by eLife are accompanied by statements that use prescribed phrases to evaluate importance and strength of support. This study uses an online repeated-measures experiment to gauge whether the eLife phrases were interpreted as intended, finding that most participants’ implied ranking did not match the intended ranking.
#####
In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available paper in PLOS Biology : http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002645
Article Title: An empirical appraisal of eLife’s assessment vocabulary
Author Countries : Australia
Funding: This study was supported by funding awarded to to SV and TEH from the Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne. The funders did not play any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
PLOS Biology
Experimental study
People
Competing interests: SV is a member of the board of directors of The Public Library of Science (PLOS). This role has in no way influenced the outcome or development of this work or the peer-review process, nor does it alter our adherence to PLOS Biology policies on sharing data and materials. All other authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.