Changes

'''Peer review''' in general refers to submitting scientific work to the scrutiny of other scientists, especially before making announcements to the general public.  It has been found to be rooted in the Biblical tradition and is a proper Christian conduct.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v1/n1/theology-peer-review Theology of Peer Review], Answer: Research Journal</ref>

'''Peer review''' in general refers to submitting scientific work to the scrutiny of other scientists (called "reviewers," or "referees"), especially before publishing it in a scientific journal or making announcements to the general public.  It has been found to be rooted in the Biblical tradition and is a proper Christian conduct.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v1/n1/theology-peer-review Theology of Peer Review], Answer: Research Journal</ref>

In common practice, peer review is synonymous with [[anonymous peer review]], a largely secretive process whereby referees review a scientific paper in strict confidence before an editor accepts the paper for publication. Ordinarily, this process will catch subtle errors in scientific work. When the stakes are high, however, it is easy to abuse the process.

Peer review is a largely secretive process whereby referees review a scientific paper in strict confidence before an editor accepts the paper for publication. Because the referees usually have some expertise regarding the article's subject, this process will usually catch subtle errors in scientific work. In common practice, peer review is synonymous with '''anonymous peer review''', where the journal editor removes the names of reviewers from their comments before passing them to the authors. After receiving comments, the author may respond, change the article to clarify things, or retract the article. When enough referees approve the publication the paper is published.

Normally, a journal editor receives an article submission and then sends it out to some readers (referees) who have some expertise regarding the article’s subject. These are usually selected from a pool of people who already published in that journal, and sometimes journals ask authors for suggestions for referees. In '''anonymous peer review''' the journal editor removes the names of reviewers from their comments before passing them to the authors.

The referees are usually selected from a pool of people who already published in that journal, and may be recommended by the authors. However, if the authors find out that the recommended referee was actually selected, this situation (among others) may become an easy way to abuse the process. The scientific journals may ask the referees to check numerous criteria, such as whether the referee believes that the topic of the article fits into the journal. If that would not be the case, the referee will usually suggest another journal to publish the article in.  The next important thing is that the article should be coherent. This means it should not contradict itself, and if parts (e.g. measurement results) are ambiguous, this should be pointed out. The next criteria is obviously that the article should present sufficiently new material, and that the new material should be clearly distinguished from material [[citation|cited]]. The next step is originality of the article. Even if new data are consistently presented, they may not fit into a given Journal. Last but not least, the style guidelines of the Journal should be followed quite exactly, and also a minimum standard in the language used must be adhered to. Peer review is not very efficient against scientific misbehavior or plagiarism.  

 

After receiving comments, the author may respond, change the article to clarify things, or retract the article. When enough referees approve the publication the paper is published.

 

There are numerous criteria which the scientific journals may ask the referees to check. One of the most important questions is if the referee believes that the topic of the article fits into the journal. If that would not be the case, the referee will usually suggest another journal to publish the article in.  The next important thing is that the article should be coherent. This means it should not contradict itself, and if parts (e.g. measurement results) are ambiguous, this should be pointed out. The next criteria is obviously that the article should present sufficiently new material, and that the new material should be clearly distinguished from material cited. The next step is originality of the article. Even if new data are consistently presented, they may not fit into a given Journal. Last but not least, the style guidelines of the Journal should be followed quite exactly, and also a minimum standard in the language used must be adhered to. One should point out that Peer review is not very efficient against scientific misbehavior or plagiarism.  

A controversial form of peer review is when physicians on the staff of a hospital pass judgment on a fellow physician, and recommend that he be excluded from the medical staff.  This has potential for abuse to eliminate competitors, which is known as [[sham peer review]].

A controversial form of peer review is when physicians on the staff of a hospital pass judgment on a fellow physician, and recommend that he be excluded from the medical staff.  This has potential for abuse to eliminate competitors, which is known as [[sham peer review]].