Thread: Seriousness In science we Trust.
View Single Post
Old 10-17-2010, 06:56 AM   #26
kennyc
The Dank Side of the Moon
kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kennyc's Avatar
 
Posts: 35,930
Karma: 119747553
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2 & PW, Onyx Boox Go6
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Having been involved in the peer review process, both as an author and as a reviewer, in my field at least (astronomy) I was certainly not aware of any "lobbying" to conform to particular viewpoints.

Do you have any specific examples in mind, beppe?

I'd love to hear them as well.

Certainly in the popular/public/news media there is spin and trickery etc. But there have been very few cases of outright bias or fraud in the peer-reviewed journals and the few times it has happened it has been revealed and dealt swiftly.

Maybe he is referring to this sort of thing:

http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54893/

http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~wstarbuc/Writing/Prejud.htm

and a whole raft of google results:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=...=1&oi=scholart
kennyc is offline   Reply With Quote