The assessment of scientific work by other individual scientists/psychologists who are specialists in the same field to ensure research intended for publication is high quality in terms of methodology, aims, replicability etc.
Aims of peer review?
To allocate research funding.
To monitor and validate the quality and relevance of the research.
To suggest minor alterations before publication, unethical and badly executed studies can be withdrawn from publishment.
Issue with peer review- publication bias (AO3)
Editors tend to favour headline grabbing findings to increase credibility and circulation and also publishing positive results
May mean if research doesn't meet such criteria it'll be ignored/disregarded
Therefore creates a false impression/limits investigations in journals if editors are selective
Issue with peer review- anonymity
Usually produces a more honest appraisal however anonymity can be used to criticise rival researchers
More likely if researchers are competing for limited research funding
Therefore some journals favour a system of open reviewing to avoid this
Issue with peer review- ground breaking research (AO3)
PR may suppress research that opposesmainstream theories to maintain status quo within field
Reviewers are also more critical of research that contradicts their own
Established scientists are more likely to choose what follows the current opinion
Therefore PR have slow down the rate of change within scientific disciplines
