The Role Of The Scientific Community In Validating New Knowledge: Peer Reviews

Question 1

What is the definition of a peer review

Answer 1

The practice of using independent experts to assess the quality and validity of scientific research and academic reports

Question 2

Why are peer reviews important

Answer 2

• it ensures only high-quality research is disseminated and available as a body of scientific evidence
• such evidence frequently becomes part of mainstream thinking and practise, so its vital that conclusions that these are based on are the subject of valid methods and accurate presentation

Question 3

What might be the problem with research being published without the process of peer review

Answer 3

• damage the integrity of that field of research, or that of the discipline as a whole
• if it’s research with practical application = then any recommendations or guidelines could be inaccurate and ineffective

Question 4

What is the process of peer review

Answer 4

• researcher writes paper —> submits to editor of a journal
• editor determines: sufficient + appropriate quality —> then will accept/reject. —> gives it to the reviewers
• reviewers have specialised knowledge of the area, they find gaps in reasoning + nothing overlooked —> returned to editors
• editors receive the article + recommendations to accept/reject it. They then accept/revise it —> return to researchers
• researchers receive any feedback + any requests for revision. They revise the article and —> resubmit it to editors
• editors receive revised article —> decide to publish or not (taking into consideration the reviewer’s feedback)
• end result = publication

Question 5

Why is peer review carried out by experts in the field of research

Answer 5

The reviewers need to be able to understand the research and current field to make judgements on its originality and significance

Question 6

How many people is a peer review carried out by + why

Answer 6

More than 2 people (they’re independent from the research and anonymous)
- to allow for balance of opinion
- if more than one person agrees on the suitability of the research the trust in its validity is greater

Question 7

Why is peer review carried out by independent people, outside the research

Answer 7

To avoid subjectivity and bias, that may occur when reviewing your own research

Question 8

Why is peer review anonymous

Answer 8

Allows the reviewer to express their true opinion without fear of reprisal or damaging relationships within the research field

Question 9

What are the purposes of peer reviews

Answer 9

1) allocation of research fundings
- the organisations responsible for spending the government and charities research budgets have a duty to do it responsibly
- peer reviews enable them to decide on worthy research

2) Assessing the research rating of university department
- future funding for the research departments of universities is dependent on good peer reviews demonstrating good quality, valuable research is being conducted

Question 10

What does a peer review check for

Answer 10

• Methodology
• validity
• originality
• publishability
• significance

Question 11

Give a model answer for the exam Q ‘Describe the process of peer review [4]’

Answer 11

• Peer review is the assessment of scientific work by others to ensure it is of high quality
• researchers send their written reports to an academic journal and the editor checks whether it is relevant for their journal.
• if it is they send it to 2 or more experts in the field (peers) who check the work’s methodology is sound, its validity both internal and external and that it’s offering something new and significant in the field of research.
• they also check for originality of the work
• the peers then make recommendations to the editor as to whether the work should be published, rejected or reviewed further before resubmission, which is fed back to the researcher.
• the researcher makes changes and re-submits it to the editor

Question 12

What are the criticisms of peer review

Answer 12

• Difficulty obtaining experts in the field of research to act as peer reviewers
• publication bias
• peer reviewers wanting to preserve the status quo
• publication bias
• anonymity resulting in sabotage

Question 13

Explain the criticism of: Difficulty obtaining experts in the field of research to act as peer reviewers

Answer 13

• It could be difficult to find an expert into __A02 context___, so the peers used may not be able to fairly assess the research as they lack understanding

Question 14

Explain the criticism of: publication bias

Answer 14

• The reviewers may decide this study is not worth publishing because they think it is less useful and interesting because there isn’t a significant difference or perhaps it won’t excite those reading the journal and increase the reputation of the journal

Question 15

Explain the criticism of: preserving the status quo

Answer 15

• if results go against the existing theories, it may not get published regardless of its validity and credibility

Question 16

Explain the criticism of: anonymity

Answer 16

• If the peer reviewers are also investigating a similar field, they may unjustly comment negatively on the psychologist’s research article so it isn’t published so they can get their own published or have less competition for a research grant