Our vision for Autism Research.

03Original abstract

One dilemma facing all researchers is the choice of where to submit their next paper. The scientific content of a Journal, its readership, impact factor, the speed of publication and how editors dealt with previous submissions are some of the factors that authors consider when choosing a venue for their manuscript. In launching a new publication, editors should convey to potential authors the essence of a Journal in order to attract those papers that will establish its future character. In introducing this second issue we articulate some of the editorial considerations underlying publication priorities. Autism Research was established by the International Society for Autism Research (INSAR) to satisfy the pressing need for a publication outlet for high quality papers dealing with the full range of basic and behavioural sciences that underlie research into autism spectrum disorders. The Journal is also an important vehicle for INSAR, whose aim is to advance autism research. The Editors recognize that these goals are well served by publishing both positive and negative findings. Exciting new findings, especially from hypothesis driven research, are the bread and butter of scientific journals, and they are sought for this journal as well. Nevertheless, research into autism is also marked by intriguing findings that have been neither replicated nor refuted, either because replication has never been attempted or because a failure to replicate has not been published. Consequently, in order to support new hypotheses or new data, authors may refer to unreplicated findings, which may simply be false positives. Scientific advance in part requires identifying those hypotheses that are not supported by empirical data and on the publication of definitive negative studies. There is usually a bias against the publication of negative findings in research. The field of autism research is one with a large, potentially vulnerable lay audience that actively follows research. Therefore, the Editors consider it important to publish both replications and non-replications to foster the ultimate emergence of a balanced picture. At times, the pressure to report positive findings in the face of nonsignificant results from primary analyses may lead authors to perform ad hoc analyses to support an auxiliary hypothesis. Thus, a hypothesis that is refuted in the main finds support in a subgroup of data. Determining scientific merit in such cases can be difficult for reviewers and Editors because the findings may help describe true heterogeneity, or they may be spurious. Subgroup analyses planned a priori, statistical limitations created by subdividing data and plausibility are all factors that help assess validity in such cases. Statistical power is an important concern, and some studies lack statistical power at the outset. The issue is particularly problematic with respect to genetic studies, in which associations observed in modest-sized samples are given undue weight; these issues will be discussed in more detail in a future editorial. For this reason, we ask authors to provide a statement regarding power in all submitted manuscripts. Studies that are preliminary, or perhaps out of necessity under-powered, should be submitted as short reports and these limitations noted. Another phenomenon in autism research over the decades has been a tendency for some influential hypotheses to lack explanatory power. Autism is a complex disorder involving both deficits in multiple domains of functioning and a very wide range of severity. Authors should to state clearly which aspects of ASDs their hypotheses and data address and which aspects of the disorder and its full range of expression are not accounted for. The phenomenon of “selective referencing” is a troubling issue for scientific publishing in general. Examples include instances in which manuscripts contain only citations that support the authors' views or referencing may appear to over-represent subset of groups, perhaps even driven by geography. Neither scenario provides a fair and balanced basis upon which a proper judgement can be made about the merits of a given study. Referencing should be broadly inclusive. Both supportive and contradictory citations and text should be provided to the reader to place the study at hand in a balanced context. What sort of papers would Autism Research like to publish? In addition to definitive advances in specific areas, manuscripts that address the complexity and heterogeneity in autism directly, or contribute to its understanding seem likely to move the field forward. Another variable that is often neglected in studies is variation in severity of phenotypic expression. Reliably measuring symptom severity, and hence identifying neurobiological and psychological differences across the spectrum, is likely to contribute to identification of different aetiological factors, advances in treatment and preventative strategies. Another neglected area is the consideration of developmental processes in neurobiological research. While psychological studies of autism are often intrinsically developmental in their approach, our understanding of neurobiology comes largely from studies of adult humans and animals. A proper understanding of ASDs requires identifying the neurobiological changes that accompany development. The last decade has seen a huge expansion in molecular and statistical genetic studies of autism. Although there is much interest in relating genetic variation to specific behavioural phenotypes, it is equally important to understand the impact of genetic variation on brain structure and function, particularly at the cellular level. Changed attitudes to post-mortem studies of autism will hopefully lead to an increasing number of submissions in this area. But it will also be important to model the consequences of genetic change in animal systems, which involves assessing the relevance of the specific model. This is perhaps more straightforward when an animal model replicates specific genetic variation found in people with ASDs. However, assessing the validity of animal models of neuropathology or behavioural abnormalities without a clear and direct genetic link is intrinsically more problematic and should be carefully addressed by authors. Publishing treatment research is not currently a priority for this Journal, as this area is well provided for by other titles. The exception to this general rule is when an intervention reveals an important aspect of underlying mechanisms. This type of data would be especially welcomed by the Journal. The Editors recognize that scientific research does not occur in a political and sociological vacuum, thus we welcome editorial articles that deal cogently with funding, ethical and public health concerns that have broad implications for the field. If potential authors wish to determine the suitability of specific manuscripts for this Journal, they should contact any member of the Editorial team for a discussion. Finally, we will seek scholarly reviews of important topics for each issue. These are solicited by the Editors from leading experts in the field, but may also be submitted as an unsolicited manuscript. If you wish to provide a review, please first contact one of the editors to discuss the idea and determine its relevance to the journal. To end, we are extremely pleased by the response of the scientific community to the new Journal. Two issues have now been published. They are available on the internet and will soon arrive in your mailbox. Thank you for submitting your work, and please continue. We hope that the guidelines offered above help authors decide what manuscripts to submit to Autism Research. In addition, we seek feedback from you, the readers, of these first two issues, about the complexion of the journal thus far, and your reactions to the direction it is taking.

Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 2008 · doi:10.1002/aur.18