Peer Review
Applied Science: BTEC Level 3 National Extended Diploma, topic 5.2.2
Peer-Reviewing
Peer-reviewing is an important step of the process of having an article published, where other scientists provide feedback on the study. It helps to provide a level of quality control to research.
Peer-reviewed journal
- A peer-reviewed journal article is read by several other scientists (generally anonymously) with expertise in the subject matter.
- These peer reviewers provide feedback - to both the author and the journal editor -regarding the quality of the draft.
- Ultimately, the journal editor will compile all of the peer reviewer feedback and determine whether the article will be published in its current state (a rare occurrence), published with revisions, or not accepted for publication.
Peer-review feedback
- Peer reviewers look for a strong rationale for the research being described, a clear description of how the research was conducted, and evidence that the research was conducted in an ethical manner.
- They look for flaws in the study's design, methods, and statistical analyses.
- They check that the conclusions drawn by the authors seem reasonable given the observations made during the research.
- Peer reviewers also comment on how valuable the research is in advancing the discipline’s knowledge.
Use of peer-reviewing
- Peer-reviewing helps prevent unnecessary duplication of research findings in the scientific literature and, to some extent, makes sure that each research article provides new information.
- Peer review provides some degree of quality control for psychological research.
- Poorly conceived or executed studies can be weeded out, and even well-designed research can be improved by the revisions suggested.
Peer review for replication
- Peer review also makes sure that the research is described clearly enough to allow other scientists to replicate it, meaning they can repeat the experiment using different samples to determine reliability.
Replication
- Each replication of a study serves to provide more evidence to support the original research findings. Often, replications involve additional measures that expand on the original finding.
- Successful replications of published research make scientists more apt to adopt those findings, while repeated failures tend to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the original article.
Replication example
- For example, it would be a major advancement in the medical field if a published study indicated that taking a new drug helped individuals achieve a healthy weight without changing their diet.
- But if other scientists could not replicate the results, the original study’s claims would be questioned.
Test yourself on Peer Review
Process of Peer Review Feedback
Which of the following describes a study that can be performed by another scientist and achieve the same results?
What's least likely to happen to an article after the journal editor has received peer review feedback?