Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals
Peer review plays a crucial role in scientific and academic research. However, the different ways that have been implemented have been criticized by the international scientific community. This essay aims to identify the main questionings raised about peer review as a science assessment tool and pr...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
Universidad de Costa Rica
2024-01-01
|
| Series: | e-Ciencias de la Información |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/eciencias/article/view/55921 |
| _version_ | 1797292140069388288 |
|---|---|
| author | Roelvis Ortiz Núñez |
| author_facet | Roelvis Ortiz Núñez |
| author_sort | Roelvis Ortiz Núñez |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Peer review plays a crucial role in scientific and academic research. However, the different ways that have been implemented have been criticized by the international scientific community. This essay aims to identify the main questionings raised about peer review as a science assessment tool and propose alternative solutions to these discussions. The field of study from which the research was approached was science and technology evaluation studies, a qualitative methodology of exploratory and descriptive scope was applied that included the search, compilation and analysis of various sources of scientific information in English, Spanish and Portuguese languages that addressed the proposed categories. A brief overview of peer review as a science assessment tool is presented, along with a summary of the main types of peer review, as well as their advantages and disadvantages. The text addresses the questionings and biases present in the peer review system that can perpetuate existing scientific paradigms, discourage novel ideas, and reinforce systemic inequalities within academia. Although measures to address these biases have been put in place, peer review remains a human-driven process and is not entirely free of bias or limitations. A series of alternatives are proposed to improve the peer review process with the purpose of strengthening the quality and reliability of peer review, through transparency, diversity and collaboration in scientific research.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T19:47:26Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-85186d3de2db4dccbebcde7c42c42a42 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1659-4142 |
| language | Spanish |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T19:47:26Z |
| publishDate | 2024-01-01 |
| publisher | Universidad de Costa Rica |
| record_format | Article |
| series | e-Ciencias de la Información |
| spelling | doaj.art-85186d3de2db4dccbebcde7c42c42a422024-02-28T20:00:56ZspaUniversidad de Costa Ricae-Ciencias de la Información1659-41422024-01-0114110.15517/eci.v14i1.55921Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposalsRoelvis Ortiz Núñez0Doctoral Researcher, Social Sciences School, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, COLOMBIA Peer review plays a crucial role in scientific and academic research. However, the different ways that have been implemented have been criticized by the international scientific community. This essay aims to identify the main questionings raised about peer review as a science assessment tool and propose alternative solutions to these discussions. The field of study from which the research was approached was science and technology evaluation studies, a qualitative methodology of exploratory and descriptive scope was applied that included the search, compilation and analysis of various sources of scientific information in English, Spanish and Portuguese languages that addressed the proposed categories. A brief overview of peer review as a science assessment tool is presented, along with a summary of the main types of peer review, as well as their advantages and disadvantages. The text addresses the questionings and biases present in the peer review system that can perpetuate existing scientific paradigms, discourage novel ideas, and reinforce systemic inequalities within academia. Although measures to address these biases have been put in place, peer review remains a human-driven process and is not entirely free of bias or limitations. A series of alternatives are proposed to improve the peer review process with the purpose of strengthening the quality and reliability of peer review, through transparency, diversity and collaboration in scientific research. https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/eciencias/article/view/55921Peer reviewScience evaluationscientific and academic research |
| spellingShingle | Roelvis Ortiz Núñez Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals e-Ciencias de la Información Peer review Science evaluation scientific and academic research |
| title | Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals |
| title_full | Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals |
| title_fullStr | Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals |
| title_full_unstemmed | Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals |
| title_short | Peer review as a science evaluation tool: main tensions and some alternative proposals |
| title_sort | peer review as a science evaluation tool main tensions and some alternative proposals |
| topic | Peer review Science evaluation scientific and academic research |
| url | https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/eciencias/article/view/55921 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT roelvisortiznunez peerreviewasascienceevaluationtoolmaintensionsandsomealternativeproposals |