Am Psychol. 2008 Dec;63(9):839-51. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.839.
In anticipation of the impending revision of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, APA's Publications and Communications Board formed the Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) and charged it to provide the board with background and recommendations on information that should be included in manuscripts submitted to APA journals that report (a) new data collections and (b) meta-analyses. The JARS Group reviewed efforts in related fields to develop standards and sought input from other knowledgeable groups. The resulting recommendations contain (a) standards for all journal articles, (b) more specific standards for reports of studies with experimental manipulations or evaluations of interventions using research designs involving random or nonrandom assignment, and (c) standards for articles reporting meta-analyses. The JARS Group anticipated that standards for reporting other research designs (e.g., observational studies, longitudinal studies) would emerge over time. This report also (a) examines societal developments that have encouraged researchers to provide more details when reporting their studies, (b) notes important differences between requirements, standards, and recommendations for reporting, and (c) examines benefits and obstacles to the development and implementation of reporting standards.
鉴于《美国心理学会出版手册》即将修订，美国心理学会出版与传播委员会成立了期刊文章报告标准工作组（JARS），并责成其向委员会提供有关应纳入提交给美国心理学会期刊的稿件中的信息的背景和建议，这些稿件报告了（a）新的数据收集和（b）元分析。JARS小组审查了相关领域制定标准的努力，并征求了其他知识渊博的团体的意见。由此产生的建议包括（a）所有期刊文章的标准，（b）对采用涉及随机或非随机分配的研究设计进行实验操作或干预评估的研究报告的更具体标准，以及（c）报告元分析的文章的标准。JARS小组预计，随着时间的推移，报告其他研究设计（如观察性研究、纵向研究）的标准将会出现。本报告还（a）审视了促使研究人员在报告研究时提供更多细节的社会发展情况，（b）指出报告要求、标准和建议之间的重要差异，以及（c）审视制定和实施报告标准的益处和障碍。
