2 ms·
Rather given the reproducibility crisis, how much salt does peer review nock off that grain? How often does peer review catch fraud or just bad science?
by stonemetal12 1y ago
Rather given the reproducibility crisis, how much salt does peer review nock off that grain? How often does peer review catch fraud or just bad science?
- Bender 1y agoI would also add, how often are peer reviews the same group of buddy-bro back-scratchers that know if they help that person with a positive peer review that person will return the favor. How many peer reviewers actually reproduce the results? How many peer reviewers would approve a paper if their credentials were on the line? Ironically, I am waiting for AI to start automating the process of teasing apart obvious pencil whipping, back scratching, buddy-bro behavior. Some believe its in the 1% range of falsified papers and pencil whipped reviews. I expect it to be significantly higher based on reading NIH papers for a long time in the attempt to actually learn things. I've reported the obvious shenanigans and sometimes papers are taken down but there are so many bad incentives in this process I predict it will only get worse.
- genewitch 1y agowho says it's "1%"? i'd reckon it's closer to 50% than 1%; that could mean 27%, it could mean 40%. I always have this at the back of my mind when i say something, and someone rejects it by citing a paper (or two). I doubt they even read the paper they're telling me to read as proof i am wrong, to start with. And then the "what are the chances this is repro?" itches a bit. This also ignores the fact that you can find a paper to support nearly everything if one is willing to link people "correlative" studies.