6 ms·

I do not want our science institutions to be pinching pennies and cutting peer reviewers. It sounds like an invitation to widespread academic fraud.

by Kapura 2y ago

pjc50 2y ago
[flagged]
readthenotes1 2y ago
What's the replicability rate now ? Pretty dismal, iirc. As for fraud, there's already plenty of it. E.g., https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_misconduct_incidents https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_misconduc...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bodiekane 2y ago
  And now this known problem will become worse and more damaging. I'm not sure what your comment was going for here, attempting to dismiss the harm here because the system was already less than perfect? A solution would be to increase the NIH budget, and pay for more replication studies and more expert peer reviewers to carefully review studies before they are published or before their findings are incorporated elsewhere. Everything that's happening under the current administration is making this problem worse.
parsimo2010 2y ago
There's no need to employ as many reviewers since they are also cutting funding for many studies and therefore have many fewer papers and proposals coming through.
sebazzz 2y ago
I’m only slightly familiar with the academic process. Who reviews the peer reviewer?
- Volundr 2y ago
  Since we are talking NIH, there is an appeals process in place [1]. 1. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/html5/section_2/2.4.2_appeals_of_initial_scientific_review.htm https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/html5/section_2/...
SubiculumCode 2y ago
Ihave no opinion about this yet, but this is, I believe, about centralizing the NIH process for setting up study sessions for reviews on grants, not the reviewing itself.
nativeit 2y ago
Slightly relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43306435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43306435 (“A Post Mortem on the Gino Case”: “Committing fraud is, right now, a viable career strategy that can propel you at the top of the academic world.”)

I do not want our science institutions to be pinching pennies and cutting peer reviewers. It sounds like an invitation to widespread academic fraud.

by Kapura 2y ago

I do not want our science institutions to be pinching pennies and cutting peer reviewers. It sounds like an invitation to widespread academic fraud.

pjc50 2y ago

[flagged]

readthenotes1 2y ago

What's the replicability rate now ? Pretty dismal, iirc. As for fraud, there's already plenty of it. E.g., https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_misconduct_incidents https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_misconduc...

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bodiekane 2y ago
And now this known problem will become worse and more damaging. I'm not sure what your comment was going for here, attempting to dismiss the harm here because the system was already less than perfect? A solution would be to increase the NIH budget, and pay for more replication studies and more expert peer reviewers to carefully review studies before they are published or before their findings are incorporated elsewhere. Everything that's happening under the current administration is making this problem worse.

parsimo2010 2y ago

There's no need to employ as many reviewers since they are also cutting funding for many studies and therefore have many fewer papers and proposals coming through.

sebazzz 2y ago

I’m only slightly familiar with the academic process. Who reviews the peer reviewer?

Volundr 2y ago
Since we are talking NIH, there is an appeals process in place [1]. 1. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/html5/section_2/2.4.2_appeals_of_initial_scientific_review.htm https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/html5/section_2/...

SubiculumCode 2y ago

Ihave no opinion about this yet, but this is, I believe, about centralizing the NIH process for setting up study sessions for reviews on grants, not the reviewing itself.

nativeit 2y ago

Slightly relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43306435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43306435 (“A Post Mortem on the Gino Case”: “Committing fraud is, right now, a viable career strategy that can propel you at the top of the academic world.”)