Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
Peer review in scientific journals assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly prepared. The process occasionally detects fraud, but is not designed to do so. [204] When peer review fails and a paper is published with fraudulent or otherwise irreproducible data, the paper may be retracted. A 1998 experiment on peer review with a ...
Peer critique, a specialized form of critique, is the common practice of professional peers, especially writers, reviewing and providing constructive criticism of each other's work before that work is turned in for credit or professional review.
Scholarly communication involves the creation, publication, dissemination and discovery of academic research, primarily in peer-reviewed journals and books. [1] It is “the system through which research and other scholarly writings are created, evaluated for quality, disseminated to the scholarly community, and preserved for future use."
The peer review process contributes to quality control and it is an essential step to ascertain the standing and originality of the research. [14] Redundant publications: Publications generally should contain new unpublished material. [15]
Code review (sometimes referred to as peer review) is a software quality assurance activity in which one or more people examine the source code of a computer program, either after implementation or during the development process. The persons performing the checking, excluding the author, are called "reviewers".
Peer review is a central concept for most academic publishing; other scholars in a field must find a work sufficiently high in quality for it to merit publication. A secondary benefit of the process is an indirect guard against plagiarism since reviewers are usually familiar with the sources consulted by the author(s).
Peer feedback, a classroom practice where students give each other feedback; Physician peer review, the process by which physicians evaluate each other to promote better quality of care; Scholarly peer review, the process of refereeing scholarly papers; Sham peer review, the process of pseudo-review done for political purposes, often in healthcare