Peer Review Cycle: Most Important And Explain Why

Scholarly peer review, also known as refereeing, is the process of subjecting an author’s scholarly manuscript to the scrutiny of others who are experts and working in the same field (Ware 2013).

2. Summarize at least four key points made by the authors. In the case of

Peer-Review Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Science peer review is important with the role that it plays in the experiment. It helps confirm the research, establish a method to be evaluated, and increase different kinds of possibilities within research groups. There are three types of peer review such as single blind, double blind and open review. Single blind is where only the participate doesn’t know if they are in the controlled group or treatment. Double blind is when both the participate and the experimenter are kept in the dark. An open blind is where both sides

You are right doing a peer review does ensure a better quality of work and allows for the writer to improve on the material being presented. In law enforcement having all work peer reviewed protect the writer from handing in documents that are filled with minimal to major mistakes. These mistakes if not identified can result in dismissal of a case or an acquittal at trial

The author of my article is credible. Honor Whiteman. She has written many other medical issues for regular people to high class doctors that are trying to learn about something new. I know this is true because that information came out of a google result. Another way my article is credible is the purpose of the article. At the bottom of the article there was a little tiny thing that said it was approved by doctors so that means doctors use that information and what is the point of making a an entire fake article and have actual doctors use it. There is no

A peer review is a process of subjecting research methods and findings to the study of others who are experts in the same field. The purpose is designed to prevent dissemination of irrelevant findings, unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations, and personal views. It relies on colleagues that review one another’s work and make an informed decision about whether it is legitimate, and adds to the large dialogue or findings in the field.

As an American we have the right to exercise freedom of speech and I believe that freedom of speech is one of the most valuable rights we have, and I have not been able to exercise this right for the last 18 years of my life. I am most fortunate to be able to exercise this right in my English 1102 class during peer reviews. In my opinion, people learn best by teaching than they do by listening to the teacher and I believe peer reviews work the same way. When I was engaged in peer views, I learned more from my own writing than I ever have been reading my own reviews. I feel this is true because we are engaging in reading over another classmate’s paper, and offering our advice that could potentially improve their essays. For our first peer review our teacher gave us a list of guidelines to go by in order to do the most efficient job in peer review. It

I have always found the peer review process to be beneficial on both ends, whether you are the writer or the reader, are being reviewed or are the reviewer. Having multiple sets of eyes proofread your paper should help more than hurt. It is your choice if you want to take the advice your peers gave. You have the option of not making any changes at all, so whether you decide to take the advice or not, it does not hurt to receive them. In Paper One, I found that peer reviewing others was a bit difficult because any comments made could be offending them. I felt that I would come off as criticizing the kind of person one is, instead of one's work since the assignment was to write about something that is personal.

I also have a process when I peer review papers. I make sure to always compliment the student’s paper and then I point out some areas where there may need some improvement. I always make sure to provide an example so they know what I am trying to say.

This peer reviewed article was much more in-depth about the health problem. There were many sources or references at the end of the peer-reviewed article, unlike the non-peer reviewed one. The non-peer reviewed article was only two pages. There was not an author, the author was anonymous. In the peer-reviewed article, the language was more formal and used the terminology from the field of medicine. The difference in a peer-reviewed article is that the peer-reviewed article is reviewed by “expert readers”. Western Libraries, states that ”after reading and evaluating the material, the expert informs the publisher if the document should be published or if any changes should be made prior to publication”. These articles can vary in length, but average between five and fifty pages. A non-peer-reviewed article is not usually reviewed by an “expert” on the topic.

Discussion Board—Your initial response will be a reflection on last week’s peer review process from last week. Explain three pieces of feedback and how you incorporated this feedback into your final draft. Also, did you agree with the feedback you received? Why or Why not? Then, respond to at least two peers. Compare and contrast your responses with theirs’. Did you see any patterns? Share your findings with your peers.

1. List the title of the article , author (s) , and the name of the journal of the peer - reviewed journal

Evidence is worked into the literature review effectively. The evidence and reasons are organized chronologically, and this organization is extremely important since the proposition focuses on the chronological progression of the argumentation style. One element I think is missing is a conclusion paragraph. The literature review seems to end abruptly on evidence. Score: 3

To develop a personal toolkit for critiquing research article, critical thinking that imposes intellectual standards will be the fundamental strategy employed (Elder & Paul, 2008; “Public Library,” 2013). Critical thinking will be employed to minimize bias from the literature review, which should provide a more solid springboard for the dissertation process. The intellectual standards that will be employed are clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, and breadth. Critical thinking should result in crucial questions and issues for potential research and the ability to articulate them clearly and accurately (Elder & Paul, 2008; “Public library,” 2013). In addition, before initiating a literature review, the focus, type, scope and academic discipline of articles will be determined (“Strategies for Writing,” n.d.). Focus will consider the thesis, predicament, or research question that will be researched. Type will determine if the search will highlight theory, methodology, or the kind of study, that is, qualitative or quantitative research. Scope will establish sources that will be considered such a range of research dates. Choosing an academic discipline such as business or psychology will help focus the search on literature germane to the dissertation goal (“Strategies for Writing,” n.d.).