Peer review

• Peer review is when experts in the same scientific field assess a study's writeup / journal before it is published.
• Stages of a peer review:

  • Submit a paper to an academic journal. The journal then sends this paper to independent experts ('peers').
  • Peers consider the quality of paper, including the research design and methods used. Considering if there were extraneous variables that were uncontrolled. Data analysis will also be checked as well as deciding if the results actually support the conclusion drawn.
  • Peers decide if they can recommend the paper for publication

  Accept = Journal editor makes final decisions on the paper to be published.

  Reject = Suggest changes.
• Strengths of peer review:

  • Scientist is more likely to be honest in their reporting and more careful in their planning as they are aware their work is going to be assessed by fellow experts.
• Strengths of peer review:

  • Media often reports scientific findings and the peer review system aids in science communication, helping journalists and the public decide if claims should be trusted or not. This is important because the acceptance of these findings turning out to be flawed may reduce the public trust in scientific processes.
• Strengths of the scientific study:

  • Quality and amount of published peer-reviewed work can help assess the quality of different academic institutions, by giving each institution a research rating. Universities and labs with a history of producing such work are likely to be favoured by students and gain government recognition for funding future research.
• Limitations of peer review:

  • Journals may struggle to find suitable peers with enough knowledge in new or very specialised areas of scientific research.
  • Professional rivalry in academic fields can result in peers rejecting papers on non academic grounds, or even so they can publish findings first.
• Limitations of peer review:

  • Peers may feel unable to challenge the work of the academic leaders in a scientific field, either assuming the author must be correct or fearing a negative response.
  • Blinding is problematic as authors can be identified by their writing styles and anonymous reviewers may be overly harsh and more likely to steal ideas.