Occasionally, MISS may publish Systematic Review articles with or without meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews are critical assessments of the literature and data sources, focused on a topic that concerns the use and analysis of measurement instruments in the social sciences. MISS may occasionally consider Systematic Review articles if they pertain to specific measurement instruments, or a family of measurement instruments, emphasizing quality indicators such as objectivity of tools, reliability estimates, construct validity, factorial validity/measurement model, predictive validity, or fairness/comparability/equivalence across groups. If combined with meta-analysis, they must include a statistical technique for quantitatively combining the results of multiple studies that measure the same outcome into a single pooled or summary estimate.
Systematic Reviews should address a specific question or open issue that is relevant for measurement practice and provide an evidence-based, balanced, method-oriented review on a focused topic in the use and analysis of measurement instruments in the social sciences. All articles or data sources should be searched for and selected systematically for inclusion and critically evaluated, and the search and selection process should be described in the manuscript. The specific type of study or analysis, population, study design, context of data collection, and tests or outcomes should be described for each article or data source. The data sources should be as current as possible, ideally with the search having been conducted within several months of manuscript submission. Typical examples for reviews of an individual measurement instrument are Eriksson & Lindström (2005) and Golley et al. (2017). For a review of a family of measurement instruments, please see Optiz, Heene, & Fischer (2017). Typical meta-analytical examples that concern reliability generalization and factorial validity are Thompson & Cook, 2002, Worley, Vassar, Wheeler, & Barnes, 2008 and Botella, Suero, & Gambara, 2010. Authors are asked to observe recommendations for systematic reviews and meta-analyses for social research and follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines such as PRISMA or MARS/JARS.
Review articles provide comprehensive and authoritative coverage of a topic area. Key aims of reviews are to provide systematic and substantial coverage of mature subjects related to measurement and measurement instruments, evaluations of measurement progress in specified areas, and/or critical assessments of scales and tests, or existing and emerging methodology.
This type of Review articles differs by the scope and level of analysis of the literature searches and the titles used. An assessment of quality of the evidence before integrating the evidence and advising on any scientific measurement instrument, test method and general methodology is recommended.
Systematic Reviews / Meta-Analyses reflect on the quality of specific measurement instruments, alternatively on the quality of a family of measurement tools. Use of this article type requires a complete systematic search of the literature using multiple databases, covering many years, and grading of the quality of the cited evidence.
MISS strongly encourages that all datasets on which the conclusions of the paper rely should be available to readers. We encourage authors to ensure that their datasets are either deposited in publicly available repositories (where available and appropriate) or presented in the main manuscript or additional supporting files whenever possible. Please see Springer Nature’s information on recommended repositories.
Maximum length (as a rule of thumb): 5000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material), with no more than a total of five tables and/or figures. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Systematic Review," alternatively "A Meta-Analysis."
Double-blind peer review
Please note: Measurement Instruments for the Social Sciences operates double-blind peer review. The following information should not be included in the main manuscript file, but should instead be uploaded as part of the covering letter:
- Title page
- Competing interests
- Authors’ contributions
- Authors’ information