Re: [asa] ? about peer review

Lynn,

For my part, the perceived credibility and/or good
reputation of the publication is nothing more or less
than a clue to me that the paper itself is likely of
decent quality. If I really want to test the quality
of the paper, I read it as thoroughly as possible to
ascertain (among other factors) that a) the authors
have used standard scientific protocols/procedures and
have incorporated/referenced known scientific
knowledge, b) their data/calculations are accurate
(depending on the field its in versus my own
experience/background, I may or may not be able to
judge all the details) c) they are exploring
alternative hypotheses and/or have characterized the
uncertainty of their data/calculations, and d) that
their conclusions seem to make sense given the
analysis, and are properly qualified/constrained. Also
a clue as to the credibility of the paper is the
author of the paper, their background/experience and
institution of affiliation -- I'd be much more likely,
at least on a superficial level, to give more credance
to a genetics paper written by Francis Collins than I
would to a paper written by someone I'd never heard of
before.

All this being said, none of the "clues" I mentioned
trump the actual substance of the paper (see factors
a-d), and even if Ken Ham wrote a paper for a YEC
journal that somehow met criteria a-d (not holding my
breath on this one), I would give it due
consideration.

Hope this helps answer your question.

In Christ,
Christine (ASA member)

--- Lynn Walker <lynn.wlkr@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd be interested in knowing how those on this list
> determine which
> peer-reviewed papers to accept and which to reject.
>
> I've only seen two criteria used here ( ie:
> esteemed publications * or* the
> entity that funded the research/study).
>
> Lynn
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 30 17:29:17 2008