“…And a lot of good science that is interesting and necessary does not (and will not) meet the four new criteria to the same degree. For example, research on pediatric AIDS (Armistead, Forehand, Steele, & Kotchik, 1998) has high impact validity but low incidence validity; nonetheless, developmental scientists consider this type of research important. In contrast, research on otitis media (Peters, Grievink, van Bon, van den Berken, & Schilder, 1997) has a different pattern of validities; it has high incidence validity and relatively low impact validity but also is considered valuable and important.…”