Peer Review

PEER REVIEW
School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

Excellence in analyzing mind & behaviour
REFERENCES
 Abebe Kirub (2014). Essentials of scientific writing.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299597302
 Read the notes in the notes section of each slides for references and self-study.

REFERENCES
 https://www.aps.org/programs/education/ethics/upload/Ethics-Case-Studies-
Student-Edition.pdf
 https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/what-is-peer-review
 https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/what-is-peer-
review/index.html
 https://www.biomedcentral.com/getpublished/peer-review-process
 https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/editors/peer-review/32888
 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975196/

VIDEOS
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRgmTtVKj9I&t=70s
 https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/
what-is-peer-review/index.html

PEER REVIEW
 Peer review is a system whereby research – or a research proposal -

is scrutinized by independent experts (peers).
 In general, the process serves a technical (ensuring that the science
is sound) and a subjective function (is the science interesting,
important and/or groundbreaking).

PEER REVIEW
 Peer review is designed to assess the validity, quality and often the
originality of articles for publication. Its ultimate purpose is to
maintain the integrity of science by filtering out invalid or poor
quality articles.
 From a publisher’s perspective, peer review functions as a filter for
content, directing better quality articles to better quality journals
and so creating journal brands.
 Running articles through the process of peer review adds value to
them. For this reason publishers need to make sure that peer review
is robust.

PEER REVIEW

PEER REVIEW

PEER REVIEW
THREE Publication of research in scientific journals. Peer review is used to assess

PURPOSES the quality of research submitted for publication and to assess its
importance. The process thus influences what science enters the public
domain, where it is published and what impact it will have (the more
prestigious the journal, the greater the likely influence of the publication)
Assess the research rating. Peer review has been used to judge the
quality of research conducted by each department
Allocation of research funding. The main funding bodies all use

peer review for advice on which research projects should be
funded in the first place and to assess the progress of funded
projects.

IMPORTANCE
 Peer review has become the foundation of the scholarly publication

system because it effectively subjects an author’s work to the
scrutiny of other experts in the field.
 Thus, it encourages authors to strive to produce high quality
research that will advance the field.
 Peer review also supports and maintains integrity and authenticity
in the advancement of science.

IMPORTANCE
 A scientific hypothesis or statement is generally not accepted by the

academic community unless it has been published in a peer-
reviewed journal.
 Peer review is a well-established process which has been a formal
part of scientific communication for over 300 years.

TYPES OF PEER REVIEWS
SINGLE
BLIND
DOUBLE
TYPES
BLIND
TRIPLE BLIND
OPEN REVIEW
TRANSPAREN
T PEER
REVIEW
• The reviewers know the names of the
authors, but the authors do not know
SINGLE
who reviewed their manuscript unless
BLIND
the reviewer chooses to sign their
report.
• The reviewers do not know the names
DOUBLE
of the authors, and the authors do not
BLIND
know who reviewed their manuscript.
• Reviewers are anonymous and the
TRIPLE
author's identity is unknown to both
BLIND
the reviewers and the editor

• Authors know who the reviewers are, and the

reviewers know who the authors are. If the
OPEN REVIEW manuscript is accepted, the named reviewer
reports are published alongside the article and
the authors’ response to the reviewer.
• The reviewers know the names of the authors, but
the authors do not know who reviewed their
TRANSPAREN manuscript unless the reviewer chooses to sign
T PEER their report. If the manuscript is accepted, the
REVIEW anonymous reviewer reports are published
alongside the article and the authors’ response to
the reviewer.

QUESTIONS
WHO CONDUCTS REVIEWS?

QUESTIONS
WHY DO REVIEWERS REVIEW?

QUESTIONS
HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO REVIEW ONE PAPER?

QUESTIONS
HOW TO DETERMINE IF A JOURNAL IS PEER REVIEWED

THE EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR PEER REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

ISSUES
 Peer review provides advice concerning research proposals, the

publication of research results and career advancement of
colleagues. It is an essential component of the scientific process.
 Peer review can serve its intended function only if the members of
the scientific community are prepared to provide thorough, fair and
objective evaluations based on requisite expertise.
 Although peer review can be difficult and time-consuming,
scientists have an obligation to participate in the process.

ISSUES
 Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer

review must be kept confidential and not used for competitive gain.
 Reviewers should disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct
competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the
authors, and avoid cases in which such conflicts preclude an
objective evaluation.

ISSUES
FRAUDULEN
T RESEARCH
PRESERVING
ANONYMIT ISSUES THE STATUS
Y QUO
INEFFICIENC
Y

ISSUES
FABRICATION
SCIENTIFIC FALSIFICATIO
MISCONDUCT N
FRADULEN
T ISSUES
FAILURE TO
DISCLOSE
PLAGIARISM
CONFLICTS
OF INTEREST

SUMMARY
 Peer review is important – it is the process by which researchers and

editors seek to ensure that only high quality research is funded and
published
 Peer review thus has a role to play in maintaining public confidence in
scientific research; peer reviewed science also informs an increasingly
wide range of policy decisions
 Although it is the best available system for assessing the quality of
science, it is not perfect; nevertheless, increased efforts are being made to
improve the efficiency and transparency of the peer review process

SUMMARY
 A peer reviewer is not expected to comment in detail on the writing. The

task does not include identifying every punctuation error and misspelling;
if the paper is accepted, a copyeditor can correct such problems
 It is worthwhile to comment in general on the clarity, conciseness, and
correctness of the writing; to note passages that are ambiguous; to suggest
any reorganization that could improve the paper; and to remark on the
design of figures and table

THINK AND DISCUSS
Dr. Marie Rolands is a tenured professor of psychology at a major

university. She has published widely in her field of industrial psychology,
teaches undergraduates and graduates, attends conferences, and runs
several research projects. Recently, she has decided to pursue an area of
research that challenges an established way in which certain worker-
motivation studies are performed. The main proponents of the
conventional paradigm are two investigators, Dr. Stephen Jones and Dr.
Claude Marcus, who work at a prestigious university.

THINK AND DISCUSS
Dr. Rolands has performed experiments and collected evidence of what

she perceives are the myriad flaws in the Jones-Marcus method. She
wrote a paper that offered her research findings, analysis, and critiques,
and she submitted it to the Journal of Industrial Psychology. The editor
of the journal sent the paper to Drs. Jones and Marcus and two other
investigators for peer review. Drs. Jones and Marcus both provided a
lengthy response to Dr. Rolands' paper, challenging her disagreement
with their method on several points. As a result, they both recommended
that the editor reject the paper. The third and fourth reviewers were split
as to whether it should be published.

THINK AND DISCUSS
The editor rejected the paper but sent Dr. Rolands a copy of the
reviewers' comments, which were signed openly and forthrightly by Drs.
Jones and Marcus. Although peer review is often considered anonymous
in psychology, some reviewers sign their names to reviews.

THINK AND DISCUSS
Dr. Rolands took issue with each of the points that Drs. Jones and
Marcus made and performed a series of follow-up experiments to point
out what she believed were the flaws in their arguments. A few months
later, she drafted another paper, in which she mentioned the criticisms of
Drs. Jones and Marcus as part of the publication. She was concerned
about submitting the manuscript, because she was fearful that Drs. Jones
and Marcus would suppress her findings again. She felt that she could
not resubmit it to the first publication, because she knew that the editor
was friendly with Drs. Jones and Marcus socially and also because she
felt that the editor probably had a status-quo view of their method.

THINK AND DISCUSS
She sent it to another journal, Applied Industrial Psychology. Knowing

that Drs. Jones and Marcus might get upset if she used and cited their
peer-review comments with their names as the foundation of a revised
paper, she explained her actions and the history of the paper to the editor
of Applied Industrial Psychology and sent a copy of the article to Drs.
Jones and Marcus. Dr. Rolands asked the editor if it might be possible to
send the paper to neutral parties so that she could get a more balanced
review of her work. The editor, however, said that he felt he would have to
send it to Drs. Jones and Marcus, because they were the most qualified to
understand the inner workings of the model. The paper was rejected
again.

THINK AND DISCUSS
1: How can someone whose research is being "attacked" provide an

honest appraisal of the critique?
2: Could it be that Dr. Rolands challenge of Drs. Jones and Marcus is
personal and not professional?
3: Should Dr. Rolands point out to the editor of the first journal his
potential conflict of interest?
4: What recourse does Dr. Rolands have now that her paper has been
rejected two times?

THINK AND DISCUSS
Over lunch one day, your advisor tells you that he is reviewing a paper
unfavorably. He rationalizes that the group that is performing the work is
in direct competition for funds with your group, and thus seeking to
undermine the work would benefit your group. After all, funding is really
tight. It is obvious to you that your advisor has put himself in a position
of conflict of interest, and is not being fair in his review of an otherwise
credible piece of scientific research. Your advisor further complicates the
situation by asking for your input, given that you are also working
directly on one important aspect of the work. You read the paper, and find
it plausible.

THANK YOU


Peer Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Peer Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

PEER REVIEW

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 Abebe Kirub (2014). Essentials of scientific writing.

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 Peer review is a system whereby research – or a research proposal -

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

THREE Publication of research in scientific journals. Peer review is used to assess

Allocation of research funding. The main funding bodies all use

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 Peer review has become the foundation of the scholarly publication

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 A scientific hypothesis or statement is generally not accepted by the

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

• Authors know who the reviewers are, and the

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

WHO CONDUCTS REVIEWS?

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

WHY DO REVIEWERS REVIEW?

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO REVIEW ONE PAPER?

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

HOW TO DETERMINE IF A JOURNAL IS PEER REVIEWED

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 Peer review provides advice concerning research proposals, the

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 Peer review is important – it is the process by which researchers and

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

 A peer reviewer is not expected to comment in detail on the writing. The

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

Dr. Marie Rolands is a tenured professor of psychology at a major

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

Dr. Rolands has performed experiments and collected evidence of what

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

She sent it to another journal, Applied Industrial Psychology. Knowing

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

1: How can someone whose research is being "attacked" provide an

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

School of Behavioral Sciences | National Forensic Sciences University

You might also like