L11 - Peer Review

Question 1

what is PEER REVIEW? - PT 1

Answer 1

RESEARCH PROPOSALS are submitted to a PANEL OF PSYCHOLOGISTS for PEER REVIEW. The research proposal is ASSESSED FOR MERIT BEFORE THE RESEARCH IS CONDUCTED.

The PANEL DECIDES if the RESEARCH IS WORTH FUNDING

Question 2

what is PEER REVIEW? - PT 2

Answer 2

Once a piece of research HAS BEEN CONDUCTED, and the RESEARCH REPORT HAS BEEN WRITTEN, it NEEDS TO BE PUBLISHED IN A SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL so that OTHER PSYCHOLOGISTS CAN READ ABOUT IT

BEFORE THE RESEARCH REPORT IS PUBLISHED, it has to go through PEER REVIEW AGAIN

Question 3

what happens in PEER REVIEW? - PT 1

Answer 3

DURING THE PEER REVIEW, PSYCHOLOGISTS CONDUCT AN INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY of a RESEARCH REPORT BEFORE DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE PUBLISHED

These psychologists WORK IN A SIMILAR FIELD to the one the RESEARCH IS INVESTIGATING. The research is considered in terms of its VALIDITY, SIGNIFICANCE and ORIGINALITY.

The APPROPRIATENESS of the METHODOLOGY and EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN USED ARE ALSO ASSESSED

Question 4

what happens in PEER REVIEW? - PT 2

Answer 4

The REVIEWERS can ACCEPT THE MANUSCRIPT AS IT IS, ACCEPT IT WITH REVISIONS, SUGGEST THE AUTHOR MAKES REVISIONS and RE SUBMITS IT, or REJECT IT WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF RE SUBMISSION.

The EDITOR OF THE SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL makes the FINAL DECISION about whether to ACCEPT OR REJECT THE RESEARCH REPORT based on the REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS

Question 5

what is the PURPOSE of PEER REVIEW?

Answer 5

The PURPOSE of PEER REVIEW is to ENSURE THE QUALITY and RELEVANCE OF RESEARCH, (e.g METHODOLOGY, DATA ANALYSIS) to ENSURE ACCURACY of FINDINGS, and to EVALUATE PROPOSED DESIGNS FOR RESEARCH FUNDING.

PEER REVIEW PREVENTS the DISSEMINATION of IRRELEVANT FINDINGS, UNWARRANTED CLAIMS, UNACCEPTABLE INTERPRETATIONS, PERSONAL VIEWS and DELIBERATE FRAUD

Question 6

+ INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY (EVALUATION OF PEER REVIEW)

Answer 6

+ INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY INCREASES THE PROBABILITY of ERRORS BEING IDENTIFIED as AUTHORS AND RESEARCHERS are LESS OBJECTIVE ABOUT THEIR OWN WORK

Question 7

+ DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE (EVALUATION OF PEER REVIEW)

Answer 7

+ The DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE can be used so the RESEARCHER WHO CONDUCTED THE STUDY IS KEPT ANONYMOUS, and the researcher also DOES NOT KNOW WHO WILL PEER REVIEW THEIR WORK

Question 8

+ SPECIALISTS (EVALUATION OF PEER REVIEW)

Answer 8

+ PEER REVIEW involves a SPECIALIST PSYCHOLOGIST IN THE FIELD JUDGING THE WORK, and they will have EXCEPTIONAL KNOWLEDGE and EXPERTISE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE BEST JUDGEMENT.

However, it is NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE to find an APPROPRIATE EXPERT to REVIEW A PROPOSAL OR REPORT. This means that POOR RESEARCH might be POSITIVELY REVIEWED because the researcher DID NOT REALLY UNDERSTAND IT

Question 9

• JOURNALS PREFER POSITIVE RESULTS (EVALUATION OF PEER REVIEW)

Answer 9

• JOURNALS TEND TO PREFER POSITIVE RESULTS because EDITORS WANT TO INCREASE THE STANDING OF THEIR JOURNAL. This results in a BIAS IN PUBLISHED RESEARCH which leads to a MISPERCEPTION OF THE FACTS.

E.g research which FINDS GENDER DIFFERENCES, is FAR MORE LIKELY TO BE PUBLISHED THAN RESEARCH THAT FINDS NO SUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN.

This could lead to a MISPERCEPTION that MEN AND WOMEN are VERY DIFFERENT when in fact, THEY ARE NOT

Question 10

• UNFAIR (EVALUATION OF PEER REVIEW)

Answer 10

• PEER REVIEW can be an UNFAIR PROCESS whereby SOME REVIEWERS have CONNECTIONS WITH CERTAIN UNIVERSITIES and therefore FAVOURITISM OR BIAS MIGHT OCCUR TOWARDS RESEARCHERS DEPENDING ON THEIR INSTITUTION