This issue of the journal begins its 25th volume. This is a major milestone in the life of any journal, and for Advances in Nursing Science (ANS) this is a particularly notable occasion. The journal has received consistent recognition in the profession for high standards of scholarship while also presenting ideas that challenge the status quo and push the boundaries of mainstream thinking. I attribute this somewhat unusual paradox to a steady editorial commitment to constructive criticism, demonstrated through the manuscript review process and the visible emphasis on "critique and replication" issue topics such as this one.

The dedicated and highly regarded members of the Board of Review have supported and sustained the editorial commitment to "treat all manuscripts with due respect, offering constructive critique to assist the author and the editor to achieve both quality and creativity, and to lay aside personal bias in the interest of promoting free expression of a wide diversity of ideas and viewpoints that can stimulate the evolution of nursing knowledge."1 Reviewers consistently demonstrate this intention in the typically reflective and constructive comments that are shared with authors. It is this spirit of encouraging both quality and creativity in the review process that has given ANS its unique character over its 25 years of evolution.

The visible emphasis on critical reflection occurs every few years with the issue topic "Critique and Replication." This tradition began "with the recognition that if there is to be growth and development of the discipline, there must be criticism of what it is and what it has been."2^(pviii) Authors are encouraged to focus on works previously published in ANS to promote and model a spirit of self-reflection. It is through self-reflection that an individual grows and matures, deepens and enriches the inner life and spirit. Likewise, as a discipline, we collectively grow and mature to the extent that we take the time to focus on self-reflection.

Critique involves self-reflection, but it does not involve wallowing in and rehashing that which has passed. Critique requires much more than simply reviewing what has been. Rather, it requires placing a new and different lens that focuses on, and sees beyond, that which was formerly seen or understood. It requires making creative leaps and taking risks to explore that which has not yet been explored. The best critiques often arise from recognizing the hard truth that problems that persist despite every effort to change them are not changing, and then examining what lies beyond the obvious, unveiling dynamics that might reveal new solutions and new paths of inquiry.

Replication in the best of scholarly traditions is likewise more than repeating that which has gone before. Replication builds on critique. Replication might take that which has previously been accomplished to a next level of development, deepening or broadening that which has previously been understood. Or, replication might introduce dynamics that are imagined to lead toward a new solution, and explore if indeed the new solution or new path of inquiry might be fruitful.

This issue of ANS continues a fine tradition, presenting articles that will indeed challenge many taken-for-granted ideas. The authors whose works appear here have taken creative journeys into several areas of vital importance to the discipline, and they have modeled excellent scholarship. This fine tradition is possible because of the continued support of the publisher, the abiding dedication of members of the Board of Review, the talents of a host of authors who submit their work to be considered for publication in each issue, and, most important, the many readers who sustain your interest in and attention to what is published in each issue. May this fine tradition continue!

Peggy L. Chinn, RN, PhD, FAAN

Editor

REFERENCES