In a study published 30 years ago in the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Douglas P. Peters and Stephen J. Ceci illustrated that who you are and where you work play significant roles in whether or not a study will be reviewed and accepted for publication at a top-tier journal. The authors took 12 articles already published in top journals by prestigious investigators working at prestigious institutes. They changed the author names to fictitious ones, substituted the real institution’s name for a less prestigious one, and resubmitted the altered articles to the journal that had published it originally. Strikingly, 89 percent of reviewers recommended against publication and the editors rejected the articles. Wow, its almost as if scientists are actual human beings with the same kind of biases, prejudices and perverse incentives that affect all of us, rather than the perfectly rational, dispassionate truth seekers weve been told they are. Weird.
Posted on: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:35:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015