strappinglad Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 http://blogs.plos.org/paleocomm/2016/02/03/how-did-that-make-it-through-peer-review/ This article and the one that it links to in Nature found at the end of the article ,seem to give some slight vindication to my statements on the flaws of peer review. I await the inevitable backlash.
thesometimesaint Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 What backlash? No scientist that I know of has ever said it was a perfect process. But science is self editing as new information comes out. 1
Freedom Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 I have heard of the frustration of the politics in the pear review process, but without it all research would be suspect. Research needs to be scrutinized. I see the same problem in the many solo sports my children have been involved in with judges showing biases and penalizing others because they don't like their coaches. But by and large the competitions bring out the best and motivate the athlete to improve so that the best, mostly, come out on top.
The Nehor Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 2 hours ago, strappinglad said: http://blogs.plos.org/paleocomm/2016/02/03/how-did-that-make-it-through-peer-review/ This article and the one that it links to in Nature found at the end of the article ,seem to give some slight vindication to my statements on the flaws of peer review. I await the inevitable backlash. So peer review is not perfect but is better then nothing. Is this supposed to be a controversial stand?
strappinglad Posted February 10, 2016 Author Posted February 10, 2016 A little honesty would be helpful. Notice that these articles were not written by cranks. They at least recognize flaws in the process and suggest possible solutions. I suppose we all could do like some here and say " nothing to see here, move along " . Unfortunately the sins of some scientists reflect on all the diligent and honest ones to the detriment of the trust the public has . I think it is necessary that the scientific community clean up the flaws and close what seem to be gapping holes in the review process . I found this same problem in the education world. Poor teachers were protected and in doing so, tarred all teachers with the brush of laziness or incompetence in the mind of the public. Is the attitude of " good enough , who'll notice, better than nothing " really the one we want pervading science?
jana at jade house Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) Himself is a highly recognizable cutting edge solid state chemist. He peer reviews regularly. (One reason why his work week tops 60 hours.) His reviews are gold. For the field he is in, the reviews are crucial to publishing. The results must be repeatable; I don't remember a time when he remarked about a sloppy review, but there certainly can be cranky reviewers. Maybe because the field he is in is so specific and everyone knows one another, if there is sloppyness or poor work, it is seen and remarked immediately. No one gets published in the best journals without rigorous overview. I like that our field is genuinely less political than some others. At least from my point of view. The new people coming out of China have it much harder. They have more competition and publishing in the best journals is more important than their actual contribution and work. ick. So yes, science needs morals. Science needs repeatable reputable results. I can remember ONE time in 25 years that someone absolutely cheated, or fudged results. We still talk about it. Most times though it's just seeing things that are not there. Humans do interpret things differently, and sometimes they are wrong. That is why peer review is important. Edited February 10, 2016 by jana at jade house
Calm Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 My husband's field is business, which covers a lot of stuff. I know he's been unhappy with the peer review process he has been involved in on a few occasions, when other reviewers have no real background in the field that the article being reviewed addresses.
jana at jade house Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 If the reviewer has no background, how in the world does that qualify as PEER review? Fascinating.
Hamba Tuhan Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 I'm an editor for an academic journal. You do not want my views on this topic. 2
halconero Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 I don't think you're going to get the backlash you're expecting. I think most scientists would love improvements to the peer review process. Being critical of the current process isn't a knock against scientific methodology, but underlies the common goal of continuously improving it. 2
thesometimesaint Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 7 hours ago, strappinglad said: A little honesty would be helpful. Notice that these articles were not written by cranks. They at least recognize flaws in the process and suggest possible solutions. I suppose we all could do like some here and say " nothing to see here, move along " . Unfortunately the sins of some scientists reflect on all the diligent and honest ones to the detriment of the trust the public has . I think it is necessary that the scientific community clean up the flaws and close what seem to be gapping holes in the review process . I found this same problem in the education world. Poor teachers were protected and in doing so, tarred all teachers with the brush of laziness or incompetence in the mind of the public. Is the attitude of " good enough , who'll notice, better than nothing " really the one we want pervading science? There is nothing magical about being a scientist to prevent us from being subject to the same prejudices, faults, and foibles of the average person. Our only claim is that you must show your work. All "Peer Review" means is that someone with the training and education in that field has looked at your work. IE; If your car wasn't working properly. You probably wouldn't take it to your barber. Not that there is anything wrong with being a barber. They just normally don't have training or education necessary to fix your car.
Zakuska Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) Good post strappinglad. On subjects involving science too often one side of the debate relies on "peer-reviewed" data as the be all end all of "empirical facts". But with science being "self editing" it kind of makes the point moot. By definition, in such a system, there can be no "empirical facts" because there is a built in clause to every "fact" that says this "fact" is subject to change in the future without notice. Another flaw in the sciences today is "science by consensus". But that's another whole can of worms. Edited February 10, 2016 by Zakuska
thesometimesaint Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 I don't know what "empirical facts" are. However I do know what empirical evidence is. IE; Is Newtonian gravity the best explanation for what we observe as gravity, or is Einstein more accurate, or does Quantum Mechanics best explain gravity, or is some other yet to be explained process involved? There will always be those who disagree with science. IE; 1/4 of adult Americans believe the sun revolves around the earth. The scientific consensus is that the earth revolves around the sun.
Calm Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, jana at jade house said: If the reviewer has no background, how in the world does that qualify as PEER review? Fascinating. I would agree, but sometimes they have problems finding people that actually know that stuff...or they are too lazy to try (I can understand this for the lower tier journals that aren't making much of a profit, so maybe not lazy so much as just not able to). There are tons of business journals out there (having to publish to get tenure, etc. tends to promote increasing journals and not necessarily quality imo). Getting someone from accounting to review something about small business startups should appear to be inappropriate, but I guess they figured the basic courses everyone has to take to get masters or doctorates are sufficient. Edited February 11, 2016 by Calm
thesometimesaint Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 15 hours ago, Calm said: I would agree, but sometimes they have problems finding people that actually know that stuff...or they are too lazy to try (I can understand this for the lower tier journals that aren't making much of a profit, so maybe not lazy so much as just not able to). There are tons of business journals out there (having to publish to get tenure, etc. tends to promote increasing journals and not necessarily quality imo). Getting someone from accounting to review something about small business startups should appear to be inappropriate, but I guess they figured the basic courses everyone has to take to get masters or doctorates are sufficient. I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Please clarify.
Calm Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 Just explaining to jana why imo some journals might make do with less than qualified reviewers.
Recommended Posts