Peer review

• We onomy says the scientific process logical research for the fire, we testigate and wiew plays in the scientific wways in which pertapen and be af scientific work by others feld, to enmire that any is of high qualky or region in terres of at goods and services ported that reet we are the co-author
• It turned out ad labricating s forced to at usheard d try to find search in ow is an chology
• The role of peer review


  The air afsone is to poor a body afknewedge based on the wuss we smak orasty and to the wider public in psychology fede apbed though celeron, tedbooks, but mast via acade Be a pee of reseash can become part of a pal homes ar by anal group of s we arthere experts (pres) the particular Shee
• The main aims of peer review

  • Barneth Anding Independent per evaluation aho takes place to bro-ordinated by government-run funding nganisators such as the Medical tech Council, who have a vested interest in establishing which research projects a worthle
  • Vode the quality and minor of each All elements of research are for quality and accassy the formulation of hypotheses, the methodology thesen, the statitical tests used and the conclusions drawn
  • Sugye amendments or improwess Reviewers may suggest minor ens of the work and thereby improve the port in creme dumstances, they may conclade that the wok is inappropsate for publication and should be withdw
• Whilst the benefits of peer review-in establishing the validity and accuracy of res are dex certain latuses of the process as open to criticism
• Anonymity


  It is usual practice that the peer' doing the saviawing remains anonymous throughout the process as this is likely to produce a move honest appraisal. However, a minority of viewers may use their anonymity as a way of criticising hall researchers who they perceive as having crossed them in the past This is made all the more likely by the fat that many researchers are in direct competision for limited research funding For the reason, some journals fevour a system of open reviewing whereby the names of the eviewers are made public.
• Publication bias


  It is a natural tendency for editors of joumals to want to publish significant headline-gabbing findings to increase the credibility and circulation of their publication. They also prefer to publish positive results (see file drawer problem, page 193 This could mean that sesearch which does not meet these criteria is ignored or disregarded. Ultimately this creates a false impression of the cument state of psychology journal editors are being selective in what they publish
• Burying groundbreaking research


  The peer review process may suppress opposition to mainstream theories, wishing to maintain the status quo within particular scientific fields. Reviewers tend to be especially cntical of research that contradicts their own view and much more favourable to that which matches t Established scientists are the ones more likely to be chosen as reviewers, particularly by prestigious journals and publishers. As a result, findings that chime with cument opinion are more likely to be passed than new and innovative research that challenges the established order Thus, peer review may have the effect of slowing down the rate of change within a particular scientific discipline.
• ples a tions for the ment research into ch has come a conside only ever form a secure a hers alone, whilst the esearch suggests that t che Crucially this role is n esearch has shown t pport necessary for ha ny promote more flex n lots of households th at many couples shu that modern paren more effectively to the development of tre work costs the econom trepart evealed that a t disorders such as dep esearch into the caus tole to play in suppor looked at treatme and gain swift acc of psychotherape Atianalety drugs are c an also be made by tion bee page 148) or ment using similar meth s that, in many case their condition effectivel gal research into dison
• Peer review can be used to evaluate scientific papers, grant proposals, manuscripts submitted to journals, research projects, and other forms of scholarly work.
• The peer-review process is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (peers).
• Peer review helps ensure that published works are valid, reliable, and relevant to their intended audience.
• Peer review ensures that published works are original, relevant, accurate, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field.