peer review

Question 1

the role of peer review

Answer 1

aim of science is to produce a body of knowledge based on the results of research

research findings ar publicised through conferences textbooks but most often through academic journals

before a piece of research can become part of a journal however it must be subject to a process of peer review

involves all aspects of the written investigation being scrutinised by a small group of two or three experts

conduct n objective review snd be unknown to the author or researcher

Question 2

main aims of peer review

Answer 2

1. allocate research funding

independent peer evaluation also takes place to decide whether or not to award funding for a proposed research project

may be co-ordinated by government-run funding organisations

2. to validate the quality and relevance of the research

all elements of research are assessed for quality and accuracy the formulation of hypotheses the methodology chose the statistical tests used and ht conclusions drawn

3. to suggest amendments or improvements

reviewers may suggest minor revisions of the work anf thereby improve that report

in extreme circumstances they may conclude that the wok is inappropriate for publication and should be withdrawn

Question 3

evaluation of peer review - anonymity

Answer 3

usual practice that 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 a rival researcher who they perceive as having crossed them

Question 4

evaluation of peer review - publication bias

Answer 4

natural tendency for editors of journals to want to publish significant headline grabbing findings

to increase the credibility and circulation of their publication

they also prefer to publish positive results

this could means that research which does not meet these criteria is ignored or disregarded

this creates a false impression of the current state of psychology if journal editors are being selective about what they publish

Question 5

evaluation of peer review - burying groundbreaking research

Answer 5

peer review process may suppress opposition to mainstream theories wishing to maintain the status quo within particular scientific fields

reviewers tend to be especially critical of research that contradict is their own view and much more favourable to those that match theirs

established scientist are the ones more likely to be chosen as reviewers particularly by prestigious journals and publishers

as a result findings that chime with current option are more likely to be passed than new and innovative research that challenges the established order

peer review may have the effect of slowing down the rate of sanche within a particular scientific dicispine