Peer review Flashcards
What is a peer review?
Scrutiny by experts of research papers to determine scientific validity
What is the peer review process?
During peer review it is usual for several expert reviewers to be sent copies of the research paper by a journal editor. There reviewers report back to the editor, highlighting weaknesses or problem areas, as well as suggestions for improvement if necessary
What are the four options for reviewers?
Accept the paper unconditionally
Accept it as long as the researcher makes certain improvements
Reject it but suggest revisions and a resubmission
Reject it outright
What is a single-blind review?
The usual form of peer review - involves the names of reviewers not being revealed to the researcher. The idea is that the reviewer autonomy allows for an unbiased review free from interferences by the researcher. However there is the danger that anonymous reviewers may delay the review process so their work can be published first or hide being their anonymity to be undeservedly harsh
What is a double blind review?
Involves both reviewers and researchers being anonymous. The idea is that the research will be reviewed without any bias. However, it is likely the researcher would be identifiable from their research topic or their writing style
What is an open review?
This involves reviewers and researchers both being known to eachother. This is seen as reducing the risk of personal comments and plagiarism and encourages open, honest peer reviewing. However,some may water down their critique on fear of repercussions
Why peer review?
Peer review is part of the verification process whereby research is deemed to be scientifically acceptable or not. It consists of a system used by scientists to determine whether research findings can be published in scientific journals
What does this system of independent scrutiny do?
Reduces the chance of flawed or unscientific research being accepted as fact as scientific experts scrutinise it before a decision is made about whether they can be published.
Viewed as the best system for assessing scientific plausibility
What do critics argue?
That peer review isn’t unbias as research occurs in a narrow social world and relationships within this sphere may affect the review process
In obscure areas of research there may be no one else with sufficient knowledge to peer review
What are two further limitations of peer review?
Reviewers have been accused of not accepting research so that their own research can be published first as well as accusations of researchers plagiarising ideas from research papers they reject
Reviewers may be resistant to accepting papers which counter things that they have found or moved away from the accepted paradigm
