Secondary Logo

Share this article on:

Response to Iliadou et al. 2018 and Keith et al. 2018

Ryals, Brenda M., Ph.D.

doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000654
Letters to the Editor
Related Article
Related Article II
Related Article III

Editor-in-Chief

Ear and Hearing strongly supports the scientific dialogue that can result from comments on publications, and so we appreciate the opportunity to share these Letters to the Editor (Illiadou et al. 2018 and Keith et al. 2018) with our readers. Because a primary concern expressed by both Letters is that of a perceived ban by Ear and Hearing on auditory processing disorder (APD) terminology, research, and publications, the Editorial Board and I have decided that it is most appropriate for the Editor-in-Chief to respond to the letters. Dr. Moore, the author of the Editorial addressed in the Letters, is in full agreement with this approach.

The authors of the Letters to the Editor have interpreted the policy stated in the editorial (Moore 2018) as follows:

  1. “A ban on the publication of certain scientific articles if the nomenclature does not accord with the nomenclature preferences of the Editorial Board” (Keith et al. 2018) or
  2. An attempt by Ear and Hearing “to restrict and diminish scientific inquiry and research and slow advancement of our understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of APD by excluding publication of research based on a narrow and predetermined concept of what APD is” (Illiadou et al. 2018).

A ban or restriction on scientific inquiry was not the intent of the editorial. In retrospect, our intent could have been stated more clearly to avoid such concerns. Please know that we find censorship in any form abhorrent. There is no ban on submissions focused on APD. There is no ban on the term “auditory processing disorder.” Ear and Hearing’s policy is to consider all submissions based on their scientific rigor and value to the clinical and scientific community. The purpose of the Editorial was to be fully transparent about the responsibility of the journal to uphold the highest publication standards across all fields of study—even those where the evidence is mixed and controversy exists. We wished to be clear that submissions focused on APD should fully acknowledge and provide evidence for their assumptions. In fact, this applies to all submissions to Ear and Hearing. Such submissions are most likely to receive positive peer review and thus meet the standards of the journal for publication consideration. As always, Ear and Hearing welcomes submissions from all aspects and fields of scientific discovery about auditory and vestibular function, disorders, and management.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

Iliadou V., Chermak G. D., Bamiou D. E., et al. Letter to the editor: An affront to scientific inquiry Re: Moore, D. R. (2018) Editorial: Auditory processing disorder, Ear Hear, 39, 617–620. Ear Hear, 2018). 39, 1236–1242.
Keith W. J., Keith R. W., Purdy S. C. Letter to the editor: Comments on the Ear and Hearing ban on certain auditory processing articles Re: Moore, D. R. (2018) Editorial: Auditory processing disorder, Ear Hear, 39, 617–620. Ear Hear, 2018). 39, 1242–1243.
Moore D. R. Editorial: Auditory processing disorder. Ear Hear, 2018). 39, 617–620.
Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.