Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

No convincing evidence of peer review’s benefits, lots of its flaws

Categories
Peer review
Science
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email
File:Flock of sheep.jpg
These researchers have just enough intelligence to keep them going. As it happens, none of it originates with them.

From Caroline Crocker at AITSE , on peer review:

If a scientific paper flies in the face of an established theory, will it be thrown overboard? According to Richard Smith, MD, former editor of the British Medical Journal, it might. He says that peer review, the process whereby the community of scientists assesses which papers are worth publishing, who should get tenure, which projects should be funded, and even who should be awarded a Nobel prize, does not work. In fact, “we have no convincing evidence of its benefits but a lot of evidence of its flaws.”

See also: Rising numbers doubt honesty among scientists