Tags: Teenage Pregnancy Research Proposal PaperA Cause And Effect EssayRay Bradbury The Martian Chronicles EssayDual Personality EssayDialogue Essay For Oral Test 4 PersonCharles Lamb Essayist LivedEssays On Social Networking SitesHistory Essay IntroductionsEssay On A Family Tradition
After the first reading, attempt to ‘mirror’ the article by writing down, in detail, your understanding of the science.This tells the authors how you — the reader — have interpreted the aims, results and novelty of their research.
Thematic Essay British Political And Social Thought - What Are Your Thoughts On Peer Review Essay
The first reading is to get an overall impression of the paper and its aims. Make sure the paper is within the scope of the journal.To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer).In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and Java Script.What's more, the reviewer has to determine if there are any major flaws in the paper. It's impossible for the reviewer to completely duplicate the experimental setup or observing program. Does it mean that the scientific community has accepted the results? It means that one or a couple random reviewers thought the paper was interesting, new, and not obviously wrong. So just because a paper has "passed" peer review, it doesn't transmute into the scientific equivalent of Gospel Truth.And it's usually very difficult to replicate the entire methods and analyses that were used to arrive at the conclusions. Instead, peer review is the One of the most important aspects of science is to actually communicate your results to your peers. Each article published in a peer-reviewed journal was closely examined by a panel of reviewers who are experts on the article's topic (that is, the author’s professional peers…hence the term peer review).The reviewers look for proper use of research methods, significance of the paper’s contribution to the existing literature, and integration of previous authors’ work on the topic in any discussion (including citations).And it's usually very difficult to replicate the entire methods and analyses that were used to arrive at the conclusions. So the reviewer has to do their best job of following the logic and arguments laid out in the paper and seeing if they agree with the conclusions. There's no compensation involved except the kudos of the editor (who in gratitude will simply send you more papers to review in the future) and a sense of obligation that you've done your duty and service to the larger scientific enterprise. Publishing a paper is considered, for good reason, a major accomplishment.It means that you've advanced the field, you've made your mark, you've upped your game.