[colechristensen]

I think what this journal doing is probably a good thing, but only as the lesser of several evils. The truth is something more like... it is easier for soft sciences to abuse frequentist statistics than bayesian. Both have merit, it cannot be argued, but it is simply easier to produce meaningless conclusions with frequentist statistics done wrong.

This situation is so bad that it merits banning frequentist for this journal and I think that's reasonable. This doesn't mean that every journal in every field should, but perhaps it will be a useful temporary measure to improve quality.