5 ms·

Is this paper peer-reviewed?

gjsman-1000 4y ago
Does it matter? Many scientists in the know say that peer review is as good as a trashy spam filter these days. This isn't to say that it is absolutely useless, more that it is very overrated.
- BitwiseFool 4y ago
  I like to think of "peer review" in the same way as "peer code review". Just because someone looked at it and approved it doesn't mean that it is free of shortcomings and defects.
  - gjsman-1000 4y ago
    Not just "peer code review" from a good friend or someone working on the same project as you - a review from somebody who has a ton of stuff to review at once, in many different areas, and very limited time to do it.
    - lazide 4y ago
      Still better than something someone didn’t even bother trying to peer review, usually.
      - lvass 4y ago
        Not always. As academia becomes increasingly autocratic and contaminated by power, peer reviews become a marker for group-think, and placing relevance into peer review is a mechanism to empower the oligarchy and suppress technical dissidence, therefore anti-scientific.
    - HelloMcFly 4y ago
      I do peer review, and know colleagues that do as well. I'd say the median number of articles reviewed per person in a given year is 10. I don't claim to represent most reviewers, but I also don't think a presumption that reviewers primarily only have time to half-ass it is fair either.
      - thaumasiotes 4y ago
        > I'd say the median number of articles reviewed per person in a given year is 10. That's a pretty light annual workload. How do you get to be one of those people? Or do those people have other work to do?
        NoSorryCannot 4y ago
        They are other researchers in the field. Literally, your peers. Yes, they have other work to do.
        thaumasiotes 4y ago
        Yes, I'm aware of those things. I'm pointing out that the number of papers someone reviews in a year is not even distantly related to the amount of attention they have available to devote to the job.
    - rat9988 4y ago
      That hasn't been my experience in academia. In peer review you can get very high quality feedback and critics. The system has been great for the overall quality.
      - yupyup54133 4y ago
        Someone is wrong on the internet!
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- surfpel 4y ago
  With the volume of research being churned out of "publish or perish" institutions, I expect a peer review to inform me on the "Is this complete garbage" metric rather than give some assured level of quality / correctness. Ie: if its peer reviewed, it /probably/ isn't /complete/ garbage.
  - gpm 4y ago
    I think the other direction is more useful, if it isn't peer reviewed (and is written in this format) it almost certainly is complete garbage. Otherwise it would be peer reviewed.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  Yes, it matters very much *if* the paper is in a reputable publication.
karaterobot 4y ago
The linked article is a press release referencing an article from a peer reviewed journal called Cell Metabolism. You can find this out by scrolling down to the citation at the bottom, which links to the article, and from there you can get to the journal website.
isaacg 4y ago
Yes - as mentioned in the article, the paper was published in Cell Metabolism, a high-quality peer-reviewed journal. You can see more about the journal here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_Metabolism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_Metabolism

Does it matter? Many scientists in the know say that peer review is as good as a trashy spam filter these days. This isn't to say that it is absolutely useless, more that it is very overrated.

BitwiseFool 4y ago
I like to think of "peer review" in the same way as "peer code review". Just because someone looked at it and approved it doesn't mean that it is free of shortcomings and defects.
- gjsman-1000 4y ago
  Not just "peer code review" from a good friend or someone working on the same project as you - a review from somebody who has a ton of stuff to review at once, in many different areas, and very limited time to do it.
  - lazide 4y ago
    Still better than something someone didn’t even bother trying to peer review, usually.
    - lvass 4y ago
      Not always. As academia becomes increasingly autocratic and contaminated by power, peer reviews become a marker for group-think, and placing relevance into peer review is a mechanism to empower the oligarchy and suppress technical dissidence, therefore anti-scientific.
  - HelloMcFly 4y ago
    I do peer review, and know colleagues that do as well. I'd say the median number of articles reviewed per person in a given year is 10. I don't claim to represent most reviewers, but I also don't think a presumption that reviewers primarily only have time to half-ass it is fair either.
    - thaumasiotes 4y ago
      > I'd say the median number of articles reviewed per person in a given year is 10. That's a pretty light annual workload. How do you get to be one of those people? Or do those people have other work to do?
      - NoSorryCannot 4y ago
        They are other researchers in the field. Literally, your peers. Yes, they have other work to do.
        thaumasiotes 4y ago
        Yes, I'm aware of those things. I'm pointing out that the number of papers someone reviews in a year is not even distantly related to the amount of attention they have available to devote to the job.
  - rat9988 4y ago
    That hasn't been my experience in academia. In peer review you can get very high quality feedback and critics. The system has been great for the overall quality.
    - yupyup54133 4y ago
      Someone is wrong on the internet!
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
surfpel 4y ago
With the volume of research being churned out of "publish or perish" institutions, I expect a peer review to inform me on the "Is this complete garbage" metric rather than give some assured level of quality / correctness. Ie: if its peer reviewed, it /probably/ isn't /complete/ garbage.
- gpm 4y ago
  I think the other direction is more useful, if it isn't peer reviewed (and is written in this format) it almost certainly is complete garbage. Otherwise it would be peer reviewed.
goodpoint 4y ago
Yes, it matters very much *if* the paper is in a reputable publication.

karaterobot 4y ago

The linked article is a press release referencing an article from a peer reviewed journal called Cell Metabolism. You can find this out by scrolling down to the citation at the bottom, which links to the article, and from there you can get to the journal website.

isaacg 4y ago

Yes - as mentioned in the article, the paper was published in Cell Metabolism, a high-quality peer-reviewed journal. You can see more about the journal here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_Metabolism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_Metabolism