Submitted #neuroimaging paper using #DTI to a highly regarded Educational journal, an attempt to bridge the 2 fields I am very passionate about. Sadly, the reviews just illustrate how far apart these fields are...in this thread I want to highlight three major challenges we face
1) Methodology: You would hope that the paper would be reviewed by a reviewer with neuroimaging background or at least some basic knowledge. However, reviewer asked us why fMRI was not included, which in his/her view could give us some insights into gray matter differences.
S/he further asked why there was no functional task during DTI & why we looked at predefined tracts & not more globally in whole brain. These questions show that there's no basic understanding of functional vs structural imaging methods & experimental design of imaging studies
2) Terminology: Reviewer stated "I would recommend using the term "Educational Implications"or "Implications for Screening and Intervention." 'Clinical' is not a word educators use very much, and it may seem a bit medical—which is not what the authors intend"
...this comment was submitted in regards to the term "Clinical implications". The paper was focused on early language reading disabilities which apparently is an educational and not a clinical problem...
3) Justifying the role of imaging studies in educational psychology: All reviewers & editor state this point. It was suggested that we provide a thorough discussion if/how/why/why not imaging may add to "Educational Psychology' providing each side of the debate.
I don't think that all Educational Psychologists should be trained in the basics of neuroimaging. However, you would hope that a prominent Educational journal could find someone with an adequate methods background for this paper. The second comment illustrates in my opinion...
...the challenges SLPs face in Educational settings and how speech and language deficits are often not considered a 'clinical' problem which can have severe implications for chosen intervention strategies. Furthermore, it is sad
that we have to justify the role of neuroimaging within Educational Psychology and outline its debate in order to publish a paper that examines FA in a white matter tract as a potential protective neural mechanism related to reading outcomes.
I want to emphasize that we received other excellent feedback from the reviewers and that some of the comments were very helpful...however, I wanted to share this experience in an attempt to address some of the challenges with neuroimaging work within "Educational Psychology"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
