Peer Review

• Peer Review:

  > the process by which psychological research papers, before publication, are subjected to independent scrutiny by other psychologists working in a similar field

  > they consider the research in terms of its validity, significance and originality

  > purpose - to act as a 'gatekeeper' to filter out flawed or unscientific research
• Peer Review Process (1):

  > before publication, research is subjected to independent scrutiny by other psychologists in a similar field to decide if it should be published

  > work is considered in terms of its validity, significance and originality - possible improvements may be suggested

  > assessment of the appropriateness of the methods and designs used
• Peer Review Process (2):

  > the reviewer can accept the research as it is, accept the research if improvements are made, or reject the research

  > the review can be open (both researcher and reviewer named), single blind (only researcher is named) or double blind (both are anonymous)

  > the editor of the journal will make the final decision on whether to publish the research, based on the comments of the reviewer
• Peer Review:

  > validity - appropriate methods and design? is research credible?

  > significance - could it benefit society?

  > originality - is it relevant to other psychologists?
• Peer Review Purpose:

  > to ensure quality and relevance of research - showing the work to others increases the likelihood that weaknesses will be addressed

  > ensures published research can be take seriously, as it has been scrutinised by fellow researchers

  > retains integrity - prevents the dissemination of irrelevant findings, unacceptable interpretations, personal views and deliberate fraud

  > determines whether research should receive funding
• Problems associated with Peer Review (1):

  > fraud - in a small number of cases, peer review has failed to identify fraudulent research before publication

  > values - psychologists try to be objective, but it is generally accepted that it's impossible to separate from personal, cultural or political views. If findings align with the reviewer's own beliefs, they are more likely to be accepted as objective research
• Problems associated with Peer Review (2):

  > bias - a review of research may be biased, e.g., institution bias (the tendency to favour research from prestigious universities) or gender bias (the tendency to favour male researchers) and bias towards positive findings

  > anonymity - due to direct competition for limited funding, reviewers may use their anonymity to criticise rival reviewers