Peer Review

Question 1

Peer Review

Answer 1

Aim of science is to produce a body of knowledge based on results of research. Could be published through conferences, textbooks, academic journals. Before piece published, it is peer reviewed. Involves scrutinisation of work by two or three experts in area. Objective review.

Question 2

Main Aims

Answer 2

Allocate research funding, validate quality and relevance, and suggest amendments.

Question 3

Allocate Research Funding

Answer 3

Decides whether or not to award funding for proposed research project. May be coordinated by Government-run funding organisation.

Question 4

Validate quality and relevance of research

Answer 4

All elements are assessed for quality and accuracy.

Question 5

Suggest amendments or improvements

Answer 5

May suggest minor revisions to improve it. Can conclude inappropriate for publication and should be withdrawn.

Question 6

Strengths

Answer 6

Usual practise that it remains anonymous so likely for honest appraisal.

Question 7

Weaknesses

Answer 7

Minority may use anonymity to criticise rival researchers who ‘crossed them in the past’ as indirect competition for funding, so some favour open review.#Editors want to publish ‘headline grabbing’ findings that increase credibility and circulation of publication and prefer positive results. So if doesn’t fit ignored or disregarded so publication bias. False impression of current state of psychology.
Used to suppress opposition to mainstream theories, to maintain status quo within particular science fields. Especially critical if criticise own view and favourable to those that match.
Established scientists likely to be reviewers so choose ones that fit with current opinion and not ones that challenge established order.
Peer review may lead to slowing down the rate of change in particular science disciplines.