3 ms·

I view peer review as respecting the time of the journal subscriber. Someone filters out the things that are obviously flawed before wasting everyone else's ti

I view peer review as respecting the time of the journal subscriber. Someone filters out the things that are obviously flawed before wasting everyone else's time. Journal aren't just a magic upload into scientific consciousness; it takes time and energy to read and process them.

Attrecomet 4y ago
It's doing a rather bad job at filtering out obvious flaws, given the reproducibility crisis we've got on our hands. Everyone says peer review is very important, but when it comes to reviewers putting in the hard and boring work of actually checking the raw data, almost none do, so in truth, peer review is NOT important to most scientists. And we nevertheless pay the price of adhering closer to orthodoxy for it, since effort being put in is a rather superficial "this paper sounds reasonable to me" filter, perhaps with some boxes that must be checked like p-value or sample size.