Editorial
Balance in advertising
W
e are all accustomed to advertising, and in our daily lives we ingest information in many forms: what's good to eat and wear, what new car is hot, how to join the army, and why substance x is best measured with a certain analytical method. I want to talk about the last kind of advertisement, which appears (in some form) in almost all research publications in chemistry. Authors want, and indeed are expected, to explain to readers why and how their results constitute advances in knowledge, understanding, and usefulness. I don't want to imply any criticism at all of such "advertising"; placing a research result in its context is a vital part of writing a good research paper. I do want to talk about the issue of balanced viewpoints in advertising. When an analytical chemistry research paper promotes a new pathway for determination of a particular substance, how faithfully should the experimental design place the target substance in its expected analytical matrix and context? For example, in a paper describing an optical fiber method for glucose and stating an objective of use as an implanted device for in vivo monitoring, should the results include a demonstration of the biocompatibility of the method's ingredients? Must a paper presenting a sensor for chromium and pointing out its importance for environmental monitoring in mine leachates give attention to the sensor's ruggedness and self-calibration aspects? What is a reasonable level of claim to make, and what is reasonable for reviewers, editors, and readers to demand in actual performance?
These are not straightforward questions to answer. Excellent methods very often do not emerge full-blown into usefulness, and in the above examples actual demonstrations of the points raised may be premature and unrealistic to expect. Clearly to expect that all such questions be answered means that the paper should describe a method that has reached the stage of evaluation for a commercial product. Here I arrive at the point I want to make. Claims of usefulness of methods in analytical chemistry papers are very helpful in guiding readers in the underlying goals and promise of the work. Readers will often not be able to make such connections, and it's quite acceptable for the author to "advertise." At the same time, however, authors have a responsibility to also point out the key unknowns that lie between the present results and the advertised application. Thus, in the glucose sensor example, it would be appropriate to mention in any claim for in vivo usefulness that biocompatibility issues remain to be explored. That is, the advertisement of potential usefulness should be accompanied by acknowledgment of the caveats. I believe it is fair for readers to expect that authors show this kind of balance. The vast majority of authors in Analytical Chemistry indeed do so, and I praise them for that. Reviewers have generally been quick to redress those who do not.
Analytical Chemistry News & Features, January 1, 1996 13 A
