Thread: Seriousness In science we Trust.
View Single Post
Old 10-17-2010, 05:14 AM   #18
TGS
Country Member
TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
TGS's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,058
Karma: 7676767
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denmark
Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
One reason, though, that the peer-review process is anonymous (the reviewer doesn't know the name of the author(s) of the article being reviewed, and the author doesn't know who's reviewing it) is to try to eliminate the element of personal bias.
I wasn't so much thinking of personal bias, but I think it is very difficult to get scientific work even reviewed, let alone published, if the claims that the work makes are in tension with what the big hitters in a particular discipline are saying. There are all sorts of reasons for this - academic career progression and access to funding are two significant ones. Science tends to progress by fairy steps and the sociology of science does suggest that giant leaps that go in a direction different from the prevailing wisdom are difficult to make and have accepted.
TGS is offline   Reply With Quote