peer review

Question 1

what is peer review?

Answer 1

the assessment of scientific work by others who are specialists in the same field, to ensure that any research intended for publication is of high quality

Question 2

what is the aim of science and psychology?

Answer 2

• the aim of science is to produce a body of knowledge based on the results of research
• it also matters how this knowledge is communicated with the scientific community, and to the wider public

Question 3

how might psychological research findings be publicised?

Answer 3

• conferences
• textbooks
• academic journals such as journal of experimental social psychology or american psychologist

Question 4

what is the process of peer review?

Answer 4

• all aspects of the written investigation is scrutinised by a small group of usually 2 or 3 experts (‘peers’) in a particular field
• these experts should conduct an objective review and be unknown to the author or researcher

Question 5

what are the main aims of peer review?

Answer 5

1. to allocate research funding
2. to validate the quality and relevance of research
3. to suggest amendments or improvements

Question 6

why is peer review used to allocate research funding?

Answer 6

• independent peer evaluation also takes place to decide whether or not to award funding for a proposed research project
• this may be co-ordinated by government-run funding organisations such as the medicinal research council who have vested interest in establishing which research projects are most worthwhile

Question 7

why is peer review used to validate the quality and relevance of research?

Answer 7

all elements of research are assessed for quality and accuracy:

• the formulation of hypotheses
• the methodology
• the statistical tests
• the conclusions drawn

Question 8

why is peer review used to suggest amendments or improvements?

Answer 8

• reviewers may suggest minor revisions of the work and thereby improve the report
• in extreme circumstances, they may conclude that the work is inappropriate for publication and should be withdrawn

Question 9

evaluation of peer review: anonymity

Answer 9

• usually, the ‘peer’ doing the reviewing remains anonymous throughout the process as this is likely to produce a more honest appraisal
• however, a minority of reviewers may use their anonymity as a way of criticising rival researchers
• this is made all the more likely by the fact that many researchers are in direct competition for limited research funding
• for this reason, some journals favour a system of open reviewing whereby the names of the reviewer(s) are made public

Question 10

evaluation of peer review: publication bias

Answer 10

• it is a natural tendency for editors of journals to want to publish significant headlines that intrigue the reader to increase the credibility and circulation of their publication
• they also prefer to publish positive results
• this means that research which does not meet these criteria is ignored or disregarded
• ultimately, this creates a false impression of the current state of psychology if journal editors are being selective in what they publish

Question 11

evaluation of peer review: burying groundbreaking research

Answer 11

• peer review process may suppress opposition to mainstream stories, wishing to maintain the status quo within particular scientific fields
• reviewers tend to be especially critical of research that contradicts their own view and much more favourable to that which matches it
• established scientists are the ones more likely to be chosen as reviewers, particularly by prestigious journals and publishers
• as a result, findings that chime with current opinion are more likely to be passed than new and innovative research that challenges the established order
• thus, peer review may have the effect of slowing down the rate of change within a particular scientific discipline