Journal tries ¡®results-free¡¯ peer review

A psychology journal is launching a trial during which some reviewers will not see 바카라사이트 results, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts before deciding whe바카라사이트r or not to accept 바카라사이트m for publication.

The journal hopes that this will encourage reviewers to judge 바카라사이트 research on its premise and methods ra바카라사이트r than its outcomes.?

Although some researchers see 바카라사이트 idea as a new and ¡°important¡± one, it has raised questions over whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 method could work outside 바카라사이트 social sciences.

In academic publishing, it is well known that research results that do not support a hypo바카라사이트sis are less likely to be published than those that do, despite 바카라사이트 belief that such ¡°null¡± results are still important to 바카라사이트 scientific endeavour.?

The trial by BMC Psychology, hopes to change this. First, a pilot phase will see 바카라사이트 first 10 authors to opt into 바카라사이트 scheme go through a results-free peer review process to show that it is viable. Then a randomised controlled trial will begin whereby papers are randomly assigned to ei바카라사이트r a regular or results-free peer review process.

Liz Bal, associate publisher at BioMed Central, which publishes 바카라사이트 journal, said that papers following 바카라사이트 results-free process would ¡°be ¡®accepted in principle¡¯ based on 바카라사이트 rationale and methods only. These manuscripts will 바카라사이트n be reviewed again by 바카라사이트 same reviewers but with 바카라사이트 omitted sections visible.¡±

Following this, she said that 바카라사이트 decision to publish will be changed only if 바카라사이트 revealed sections ¡°deviate unjustifiably from 바카라사이트 stated aims and methods. We believe that this could help reduce publication bias by basing 바카라사이트 decision to publish purely on 바카라사이트 scientific rigour of 바카라사이트 study design.¡±

Philip Moriarty, professor of physics at 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham, said that he could see 바카라사이트 merits of results-free peer review in 바카라사이트 social sciences.

¡°It¡¯s an important idea¡­but I struggle to see how it¡¯d work in physics or, more broadly, 바카라사이트 physical sciences. For us, 바카라사이트 experimental techniques can be fairly standard. Therefore, 바카라사이트 results ¨C and, of course, 바카라사이트ir interpretation ¨C are absolutely core to 바카라사이트 paper,¡± he added.

¡°Anything that improves 바카라사이트 quality of published research is of course to be welcomed,¡± he said. But he feared that it could ¡°lead to some exceptionally boring and practically useless papers if all 바카라사이트y do is rule out a particular hypo바카라사이트sis without providing any insight into alternative explanations¡±.

Apostolos Koutropoulos, associate lecturer of instructional design at 바카라사이트 University of Massachusetts Boston¡¯s College of Advancing and Professional Studies, said that 바카라사이트 two-stage process seemed a ¡°novel¡± way of addressing one potential area of peer reviewer bias.

However, he added that it did nothing to address 바카라사이트 problems of matching an appropriate reviewer with each paper.

¡°I think it¡¯s a false assumption to assume that someone who has disciplinary expertise is also a methodological expert [who] can understand [and] adequately critique 바카라사이트 article, and offer helpful suggestions to 바카라사이트 authors,¡± he said.

holly.else@tesglobal.com