The Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis publishes original experimental studies in all areas of psychology where the null hypothesis is supported. The journal emphasizes empirical reports with sound methods, sufficient power, with special preference if the empirical question is approached from several directions. A theoretical article may be accepted if it represents a contribution to a field. The journal is peer reviewed.
The Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis is published bi-yearly, by Reysen Group, Department of Psychology, Texas A&M-Commerce, Commerce, TX 75429, (903) 413-7026. firstname.lastname@example.org
JASNH has been mentioned in the following publications:
Monitor on Psychology May 2002, Vol. 33, No. 5
Observer May 2002, Vol. 15, No. 5
JASNH is listed on the following sites:
psych wURLd- Mega psych Bookmarks
Why was JASNH founded? Which benefits does it provide compared to
JASNH was founded to provide psychologists a resource to publish research that does not reach statistical significance. The journal is online so there are no page restriction or cost for the authors or readers. Traditional print journals can be expensive for the consumer, thus restricting the information to persons with paid access to the journal. When I publish in conventional journals it can take months or years to actually see the final article printed. Moving the entire process online is becoming commonplace for journals. However, providing scientific information to the public for free has yet to be realized in our field. Online journals are efficient and relatively inexpensive to produce. Psychology, as well as other scientific disciplines, needs to do a better job of disseminating information to the public. A problem in the field is the perception that online journals are not reputable or reliable sources to reference. JASNH is peer reviewed, like most psychological journals, to ensure that the methodology is sound and the research was properly conducted and reported.
The main aim of JASNH is to reverse the perception that null (non-significant results) are necessarily bad. The file-drawer problem is that psychologists, and scientists in general, will not report research that does not meet traditional levels of significance. If a study has null results psychologists will often abandon the research to move on to other ideas and not report the findings. The result is that the journals are filled with studies that reached significance. For example, there may have been 20 null studies conducted on a topic but one significant study reported in the literature. If I then try to research the same topic I may be wasting time and money on that idea. — Stephen Reysen