4 ms·

I think you meant s/peer review/replication study/g. Peer review aims to check that papers are publishable, not refute or affirm them by replicating their resu

by an_ko 11y ago

I think you meant s/peer review/replication study/g. Peer review aims to check that papers are publishable, not refute or affirm them by replicating their results; that's a separate process. I agree shills will eventually get sorted out though. The truth always wins in the end. Just not as fast as just peer review.

nickff 11y ago
Replication should be done more often, and anonymization may serve to catalyze such an increase. Peer review is supposed to examine a paper for flaws, and do so fairly for all authors. This determination of which papers are well thought-out and documented is then supposed to decide which are publishable. I think you are also tacitly describing a pessimistic view (which I share) of the reality of peer review, that it does not succeed in these lofty aims, and that publishability is influenced by a number of extraneous factors.