Peer Review

Question 1

Peer review

Answer 1

Research proposals are sent to a panel of psychologists for peer review, the panel asses the research proposal for merit and decides wether to find it or not.
Before it has been published is goes through peer review again, psychologists do an independent look at the study and decide wether or not it should be published. It is looked at in terms of validity, significance and originality.

The reviewers can accept it how it is, or accept it with revisions made by the author or rejection without revisions. The editor gets final say based in what the other psychologists suggest. A peer review is supposed to ensure the quality, relevance of the research, accuracy of findings, designs of the research etc. It prevents fraud, personal claims, irrelevant findings etc

Question 2

Peer review evaluation strengths

Answer 2

• ) independent scrutiny increases the chance of errors being identified as they will be more objective about the work
• ) the double blind procedure can be used so the researcher dies not know who will over review their work and they remain anonymous to everyone else.
• ) Peer reviews use experts in the the field of the study so they are likely to make correct decisions however an appropriate expert can nit always be found to review the research leading to the review being affected by his much of it was truly understood

Question 3

Peer review evaluation weaknesses

Answer 3

• )Journals tend to prefer positive results to negative results because editors want to increase the journals standing, this leads to biases in public perception of published research and facts as one side of the argument is being published more
• ) peer reviews can be unfair if certain specialists have connections to certain institutions such as universities and favouritism can occur.