The most important aspect is peer review. At least in physics, journals assign your paper to an Editor (a scientist), that may reject it directly if it is not scientific. If it is, they will send it to another scientist to read the work and (a) suggest rejection, (b) suggest accepting the work directly or (c) in the most common scenario accept the paper for publication after some revisions. The editor reads the review and the informs the author of the paper accordingly, and the story iterates until the work is fine for the reviewer.
There can be more than one reviewer (a.k.a. referee). The editor is what the journal offers, together with some spell checking service before publication. Editors are payed, and referees only sometimes.
Well this is how science works, right? You formulate hypotheses, build expectations and finally test them.
For example, the expected influence of more talkative parents would be erased by other factors, like (and this is a mere example) the exposition to sounds in the woumb.
I did, last time two months ago. Unfortunately their presentation software is pretty minimal at the moment, and I prefer the fully open ODP standard. Anyways, at the time there was an issue with videos that weren't playing at all.
I saw a Libreoffice community but wasn't very active.. so I thought here I could find users of the software and experts on the possible technical issue. Hope this doesn't bother too much.
This is weird, at least. Any hints or hypotheses on the risk of not updating?