Peer Review

Question 1

When does peer revise occur?

Answer 1

Before a research study is published

Question 2

What are the aims of peer review?

Answer 2

Provide recommendations about whether the research should be published or not
A way to check validity of research
Assessment the appropriateness of the procedure and methodology
Judge the significance of the research to wider context (human behaviour)
Assess the work’s originality and ensure that other relevant research is detailed

Question 3

Drawbacks of peer review: rivals?

Answer 3

Peer reviews are anonymous- people may criticise their rivals in their field of psychology
Tends to be limited funding for new researcher- element of competition may breed jealousy
Inaccurate/unfair criticism may be received- not a valid reflection of the quality of the research

Question 4

Peer review issues: finding a suitable peer?

Answer 4

Especially true when it is a newer topic
Research which is not of high quality may pass anyway as there is no other research to compare it to

Question 5

Strengths of peer review?

Answer 5

The process helps to prevent any substandard research from entering the mainstream- serves to protect the reputation of the discipline

Question 6

How is peer review conducted?

Answer 6

The manuscript is sent to two or three experts in the same field
These experts review the quality of the work to decide whether its good enough to be seen by the rest of the scientific community
The reviewers then make comments on the work-it is then returned back to the original scientist who makes any corrections

Question 7

Why is peer review done : funding?

Answer 7

To allocate funding- universities are rated according to the quality of research they produce
Those conducting better research receive more funding for future projects because it is seen as less of a risk for those giving the money

Question 8

Why is peer review done: fraudulent research?

Answer 8

If researchers make up their data, the whole point of science is compromised- the peer review process should prevent this

Question 9

Anonymity: good or bad?

Answer 9

Good- feedback is anonymous so reviewers can be honest
Bad- some academic fields involve only a few researchers so it can become a way of criticising rivals

Question 10

Publication bias?

Answer 10

Journal editors are under pressure to publish findings that found positive results e.g. that there is an association between these factors
Even though finding out 2 variables are not related is just as important- e.g. this therapy does NOT work
Negative results are less likely to be publishes even though they are just as important

Question 11

Burying groundbreaking research?

Answer 11

If a reviewer reads an interesting finding by a rival, they may be tempted to prevent publication then repeat the study and claim the credit
They may decide not to publish research that holds a different view to their own