Transcript Peer-Review in Scientific Literature

Chris Luszczek
Biol2050
week 3 Lecture
September 23, 2013
What is Peer-review?
• Quality control on scientific
research prior to publication
• Expert criticism of
experimental work
• Important part of the
scientific method
– Ensures results are supported
– Rewards novel ideas and
scientific work
– Helps settle scientific debates
– Fuels future research
How is it done?
• Typically a Double-blind process
– Both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are hidden from
each other
• Usually 3 reviewers, corresponding through an
editor
Why is this important?
• Evaluating researcher hones critical thinking
• Builds knowledge of different experimental
methods and data analyses
• Helps develop an understanding of the
positives and negatives in the way science is
presented
• on-going cycle of improvement to the body of
scientific literature being published
Ensures honest
scientific reporting
and helps avoid
distortion of results
Utility for undergraduate success
• Critical to be able to evaluate primary
literature
– Quickly and critically extract main results,
understand experimental design and analyses.
• Makes us more critical writers
– Critically analyzing other papers makes us better
editors and writers of our own work.
Effective reading of peer-reviewed
literature
• Is the research
question/hypothesis clearly
presented?
• Does the research follow
logically from prior knowledge?
• Is the article appropriately
structured and clearly
presented?
• Can you easily summarize the
key message in the article?
• Does the title reflect the
contents and is it engaging?
• Does the article fit with the
scope of the journal (or lab
being reported on)?
• Does it take account of relevant
recent and past research in the
field?
How to read/write a paper in minutes
Title
• Indicates the main finding
Abstract
• concisely written?
• Provides a clear overview of the work?
• Contains the essential facts from the
paper?
• Ends by placing the work in a broader
context, highlighting its significance?
Intro
• Provides a clear, concise background to
the study?
• Outlines the aims of the study and
hypotheses
• Provides context to the current work
• Motivation for the work is explained
• Is there satisfactory citation of prior
literature?
Methods
• Enough detail to replicate study?
• Is it clear what measured?
• Are the statistical design and analyses appropriate?
Results
• Are the results provided in a form that is easy to interpret and
understand?
• Have results for all the questions asked been provided?
• Are the figures and tables appropriate?
• Have the correct units of measurement been used?
Discussion and Conclusions
• Have the authors answered their research question(s)/hypotheses?
• Are the conclusions drawn from the results justified?
• Has the significance of the study been fully explained?
• How do the results relate to similar studies?
• By how much has this study advanced the current understanding of
the science?
Lab report marking scheme
1 mark - Title page
– All info present
– Quality of title
3 marks - Abstract <300 words
– Touches on all sections of the paper
– Final sentence highlighting significance, overall quality.
5 marks - Introduction 1 paragraph.
– Begins general without grandiose, sweeping statements
– Introduces the relevant ideas and background info to the
study topic
– Final sentences states what you will test in this study
2 marks – Methods – 1 paragraph, no citations
– Written in the student’s own words
– TA can follow and can reproduce based on description
Results
2 marks - Written
–
–
–
–
Findings are listed in direct, simple language
The figure is cited
Do not start sentences with Table 1 shows that…
Report on statistics (p-values from tests)
4 marks - Tables/figures
– All tables/figures cited in text
– Proper figure and table captions – properly formatted and informative
– Figures and statistics are well matched to study hypotheses/objectives
8 marks – Discussion – 1 paragraph
– ‘What it means’ in ecology is usually one of the following.
• Supports/differs from previous studies on this topic.
• Relevance to theory or hypotheses.
• Relevance to management.
• Explain why you found the pattern you detected and
what it means.
– Relate results to the study questions/objectives
– Answer questions from the lab manual
– Relevant journal articles are used and discussed in relation
to the study and results, citations are provided
3 marks - Literature Cited
– 3 journal sources cited
– Proper citation format used
– Matching in text citations for all references listed
3 marks - Attendance/participation
2 marks - General quality of scientific reporting
2 marks - Overall quality of writing
Total = 35 Marks