Peer review
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 22:35, 2 October 2009 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | '''Publication bias''' arises from the tendency for [[research]]ers and editors to handle experimental results that are positive (they found something) differently from results that are negative (found that something did ''not'' happen) or inconclusive. | + | |
| - | ==See also== | + | '''Peer review''' (also known as '''refereeing''') is the process of subjecting an author's [[Scholarly method|scholarly]] work, research, or [[idea]]s to the scrutiny of others who are [[expert]]s in the same field. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish; and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Although generally considered essential to academic quality, peer review has been [[Peer_review#Criticisms|criticized]] as ineffective, slow, and misunderstood (see [[anonymous peer review]] and [[open peer review]]). |
| - | *[[Selection bias]] | + | |
| - | *[[Confirmation bias]] | + | |
| - | *[[Counternull]] | + | |
| - | *[[List of cognitive biases]] | + | |
| - | *[[Meta-analysis]] | + | |
| - | *[[Null hypothesis]] | + | |
| - | *[[Parapsychology]] | + | |
| - | *[[Peer review]] | + | |
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Current revision
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish; and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Although generally considered essential to academic quality, peer review has been criticized as ineffective, slow, and misunderstood (see anonymous peer review and open peer review).
