Cargando…

Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review

Peer review is the pillar of the integrity of science communication. It is often beset with flaws as well as accusations of unreliability and lack of predictive validity. 'Rational cheating' by reviewers is a threat to the validity of peer review. It may diminish the value of good papers b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Barroga, Edward F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4234909/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25408573
http://dx.doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.11.1450
_version_ 1782344933670125568
author Barroga, Edward F.
author_facet Barroga, Edward F.
author_sort Barroga, Edward F.
collection PubMed
description Peer review is the pillar of the integrity of science communication. It is often beset with flaws as well as accusations of unreliability and lack of predictive validity. 'Rational cheating' by reviewers is a threat to the validity of peer review. It may diminish the value of good papers by unfavourable appraisals of the reviewers whose own works have lower scientific merits. This article analyzes the mechanics and defects of peer review and focuses on rational cheating in peer review, its implications, and options to restrain it.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4234909
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42349092014-11-18 Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review Barroga, Edward F. J Korean Med Sci Special Article Peer review is the pillar of the integrity of science communication. It is often beset with flaws as well as accusations of unreliability and lack of predictive validity. 'Rational cheating' by reviewers is a threat to the validity of peer review. It may diminish the value of good papers by unfavourable appraisals of the reviewers whose own works have lower scientific merits. This article analyzes the mechanics and defects of peer review and focuses on rational cheating in peer review, its implications, and options to restrain it. The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences 2014-11 2014-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4234909/ /pubmed/25408573 http://dx.doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.11.1450 Text en © 2014 The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Special Article
Barroga, Edward F.
Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review
title Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review
title_full Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review
title_fullStr Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review
title_full_unstemmed Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review
title_short Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review
title_sort safeguarding the integrity of science communication by restraining 'rational cheating' in peer review
topic Special Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4234909/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25408573
http://dx.doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.11.1450
work_keys_str_mv AT barrogaedwardf safeguardingtheintegrityofsciencecommunicationbyrestrainingrationalcheatinginpeerreview