1 / 14

What Is Peer Review?

What Is Peer Review?. Dr. Heather E. Douglas Philip M. Phibbs Assistant Professor of Science and Ethics University of Puget Sound. Peer review is…. a formal review by peers whose purpose is To help improve the final product. To perform a gate keeping function. What is not peer review?.

gabi
Download Presentation

What Is Peer Review?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What Is Peer Review? Dr. Heather E. Douglas Philip M. Phibbs Assistant Professor of Science and Ethics University of Puget Sound

  2. Peer review is… a formal review by peers whose purpose is • To help improve the final product. • To perform a gate keeping function.

  3. What is not peer review? • “Non-peer” review • Peer “non-(formal) review”

  4. “Non-peer” review i.e., review by the general public Examples: public comment periods public reception of intellectual work Key difference: reviewers need not meet a standard of expertise

  5. Peer “non-(formal) review” i.e.,peer consultation Examples: sharing papers with colleaguesdiscussions among colleagues Key differences: no formal review process peers consulted no longer independent

  6. So, what is peer review? • Different purposes <=> Different processes • Described by: • Product under review • Goal • Standards • Process • Stakes

  7. Product: Goal: Process: Stakes: Dissertation Produce competent peers Reviewers not blind Not really independent Do you get your degree? Does an incompetent PhD get out? Dissertation Defense

  8. Tenure evaluation Product: Goal: Process: Stakes: Tenure file Keep competent peers Weed people out of institution Reviewers can be both independent and previous consultants Job security Permanent colleague

  9. Key Differences with Product Peer Review 1) No opportunity to improve product post-review 2) Independence of reviewers doubtful Thus these review processes are very emotionally charged

  10. Publication Review Product: Goal: Standard: Process: Stakes: Paper Publish interesting new work Guard limited publication resources Is this piece competent? Will it make a contribution to the field? Usually double blind 2-3 reviewers Maintain value of publication Make new work available

  11. Grant review Product: Goal: Standard: Process: Stakes: Grant proposal Protect limited funds Support worthwhile work Is this project worth funding? Single blind Multiple reviewers Good use of funds Funding valuable work

  12. Regulatory review Product: Goal: Standard: Process: Stakes: Regulatory document Ensure solid scientific basis for policy Is this the most accurate account of science? (Are the interpretations correct?) No blinding possible Usually many reviewers, often meeting as a group Are we making the right decision? Harm/help those affected

  13. As the stakes get higher… As the stakes get higher, the complexity of the review increases and thus the difficulty of the review process increases. Regulatory peer review has the highest stakes. That is the challenge of regulatory peer review.

  14. For more information see: For more information see: Peerless Science; Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy by Daryl Chubin and Edward J. Hackett (1990). The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers by Shiela Jasanoff (1991).

More Related