Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Peer Review - Coggle Diagram
Peer Review
Validate?
-
The editor of the journal examines the topic of the manuscript and send copies to other psychologists who are experts in that topic - peer reviewers
-
They then send it back to the editor with comments and a recommendation about its suitability for publication
Using these reports, the editor then has to decide whether the research should be accepted for publication, whether it should be revised or whether it should be rejected
Limitations
In a very small number of cases, it has failed to detect fraudulent research including, fabrication, fabrication and plagiarism.
Most findings build on previous knowledge or theories. Research that does not fit with previous work is often seen as suspect and rejected. This means new findings that go against existing theories might not be published.
-
-
Why is it used?
Important part of this process because it provides a way of checking validity of the research, making a judgment about the credibility of the research and assessing the quality and appropriateness of the design and methodology
Important because it is difficult for authors and researchers to spot every mistake in a piece of work. Showing the work to others increases the probability that weaknesses will be identified and addressed.
It helps to prevent dissemination of irrelevant findings, unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretation, personal views and deliberate fraud.
Peer Review
The process by which psychological research papers, before publication in a journal, are subjected to independent scrutiny by other psychologists working in a similar field who consider the research in terms of its validity, significance and originality.
- Accept the work unconditionally 2. Accept it so long as the researcher improves it in certain ways 3. Reject it but suggests revisions and resubmission 4. Reject it outright
Single Blind Review: Involves the names of reviewers not being revealed to researcher - anonymity allows for an unbiased review. However, it may lead to them publishing similar research first.
Double Blind Review: Both reviewer and researcher being anonymous. No gender bias will occur and that the research will be peer reviewed fairly and no be based upon researchers name.
Open Review: Reviewer and researcher are known to each other. Reducing risk of personal comments and plagiarism and encourages open, honest peer reviewing.