member survey had 85% male responders
and 78.5% doctorates. It appears responders
to all but the longtime member survey are
generally more female and have fewer doc-
torates, representing demographic trends at
the ASA.
Preferred Journals, Reading
Table 1 — Preferred Journals and Reading Habits for the Last 4 Issues (reading percentages
Habits, and Impressions
across a row are for those respondents who listed that journal as a preferred journal)
The survey began by asking respondents to
identify their “preferred” ASA journals and to
Journal % Preferred All 4 Three Two One None
identify their recent reading habits for each,
assuming at least one preference (see Table 1).
JASA 67.3 38.5 6.8 17.1 12.7 24.8
More respondents identified JASA (67%) and
TAS (59%) as preferred ASA journals than
TAS 59.0 45.2 8.6 15.4 11.1 19.7
the more specialized journals (ranging from
JBES 12.7 43.3 6.7 11.7 8.3 30.0
~7% to ~18%). However, most respondents
have read two or fewer of the past four issues
JCGS 17.7 32.9 5.9 11.8 16.5 32.9
of their preferred journal. This varies by jour-
nal, ranging from 46% for TAS to 81% for
JABES 6.7 25.0 6.3 12.5 9.4 46.9
Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research (SBR).
Table 1 displays summary statistics for this
TECH 18.1 27.4 6.0 17.9 13.1 35.7 line of questioning.
Most respondents report only browsing
SBR 14.0 15.9 3.2 11.1 12.7 57.1
the table of contents when they do read
their preferred journals: 42% for JBES and
N/A 8.1
up to 62% for the Journal of Agricultural,
Biological, and Environmental Statistics
(JABES). A fair proportion (in the 15%–
30% range) further reviews the abstracts.
As might be expected, very few respon-
dents read all journal articles. Respondents
were asked how often they read all the
Table 2 — General Reading Frequency Across Journals (percentage of respondents
journals covered by the survey. The read-
by journal)
ing frequency varies by journal: JASA and
TAS garner the highest readership across
Journal Always Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never the general response base, while the other
journals—perhaps by virtue of their more
JASA 13.4 24.9 28.1 20.9 12.7 focused scope—experience the highest
proportion of “seldom” and “never” read-
TAS 16.5 22.0 29.1 18.6 13.8 ers (see Table 2).
The most common reason reported by
JBES 3.6 4.4 10.1 16.3 65.6
respondents for reading journals is to stay
current with research for professional and
JCGS 3.1 6.4 16.3 21.9 52.4
personal reasons. This was observed across
all ASA journals. Common outcomes
JABES 1.3 2.4 6.3 13.6 76.5
of reading are to further research, incor-
porate findings into professional work,
TECH 2.0 8.0 11.8 26.9 51.3
and increase awareness of potentially new
SBR 1.0 3.4 8.3 15.3 72.0
research interests.
Table 3 displays the proportion of
respondents who either agreed with or
strongly agreed with positive statements
made about each journal. TAS achieved the
best overall responses, with SBR and JASA
making a strong showing (see Figure 1).
Generally, respondents had positive things
to say about all journals.
AUGUST 2008 AMSTAT NEWS 5
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68