Critical Thinking
Assessment A
Do you agree that freely available online resources are as credible
and useful for assessed work as peer-reviewed academic journal
articles?
Published academic articles are an evaluation of scientific or professional studies of
those who work in the same field. Peer review selection is dependent on their
professional expertise, (Chibnik, 2016). But are they more reliable than freely
available articles? This essay will argue that peer reviewed resources and articles
are a more reliable source of information than those that are freely available or
non-peer reviewed (Wiley, 2013). The essay will look at the peer review process and
how guidance helps the authors to broaden and build on their innovations.
Highlighting how peer review plays a role in the integrity of research, as well as
picking up on the criticism of how it has its flaws. Be that as it may, the peer review
process remains the most significant influence of content published in journals.
The “Peer review process has been the cornerstone of the scientific method since
the 1600s” (Chace, 2010). Peer reviewers are academic professionals, experts of
independent research with a background in their respective fields, (Peer review
process, no date). Whom investigate and scrutinise academic articles for publication.
Journals depend upon peer reviewers to read and decide on the standard of the
manuscript as a research article, (Chibnik, 2016). Therefore, when an editor looks at
a manuscript they need to ensure that it speaks of “integrity and ethics'' (Tempelhoff
2020). According to Baker et al (2017), it is normally down to one of the journals
editors to ensure that academic articles submitted are relevant to the title, the current
field of research as well as containing the correct data and information. They will look
, at the standard of writing, ensuring that it remains ethical, and non biassed. This
quality is essential to the integrity of research, (Marvrogenis et al, 2020). It is
distributed to subject matter expert reviewers for their feedback. Peer reviewers are
called upon to assist the journal editors in the decision making on whether the
manuscripts are put forward for publishing, (Jirschitzka, et al. 2017).
Manuscript rejection is common and of a high percentage. Although discouraging
reviewer’s comments and recommendations can be a tool to enhance the author's
innovation of ideas. Wooley and Barron, (2019) published that 62% of manuscripts
are rejected first time around and that approximately 50% of the manuscripts which
have been rejected, go on to be published within 2 years, after making adjustments
given through feedback. The reviewers’ and editors' recommendations are a key tool
in academics turning in a high quality manuscript. It is a crucial point for moving
forward to having research published. Requests to revise and resubmit should be
seen as constructive feedback enabling positive changes to be made. However, this
is dependent on the authors commitment to having their articles published. Although
it's still criticised that the peer review process is unreliable. Chibnik (2016) stated that
the method for evaluating an article varies greatly. While Hirst and Altman (2010),
looked into 116 journals finding that only 35% where given an online process of the
marking guidelines. After completing some extensive reading into Bornmanns (2011)
statistical studies and Shatz’s (2004) inquiry. It was noted that not a huge amount of
evidence has been published on this area. Though, it was suggested that guidance
tools are being used to help peer reviewers and journal editors to improve their
quality of evaluation. Every journal has a set of guidelines for evaluation: covering
topics such as credibility, research and publication ethics. An example can be found
Assessment A
Do you agree that freely available online resources are as credible
and useful for assessed work as peer-reviewed academic journal
articles?
Published academic articles are an evaluation of scientific or professional studies of
those who work in the same field. Peer review selection is dependent on their
professional expertise, (Chibnik, 2016). But are they more reliable than freely
available articles? This essay will argue that peer reviewed resources and articles
are a more reliable source of information than those that are freely available or
non-peer reviewed (Wiley, 2013). The essay will look at the peer review process and
how guidance helps the authors to broaden and build on their innovations.
Highlighting how peer review plays a role in the integrity of research, as well as
picking up on the criticism of how it has its flaws. Be that as it may, the peer review
process remains the most significant influence of content published in journals.
The “Peer review process has been the cornerstone of the scientific method since
the 1600s” (Chace, 2010). Peer reviewers are academic professionals, experts of
independent research with a background in their respective fields, (Peer review
process, no date). Whom investigate and scrutinise academic articles for publication.
Journals depend upon peer reviewers to read and decide on the standard of the
manuscript as a research article, (Chibnik, 2016). Therefore, when an editor looks at
a manuscript they need to ensure that it speaks of “integrity and ethics'' (Tempelhoff
2020). According to Baker et al (2017), it is normally down to one of the journals
editors to ensure that academic articles submitted are relevant to the title, the current
field of research as well as containing the correct data and information. They will look
, at the standard of writing, ensuring that it remains ethical, and non biassed. This
quality is essential to the integrity of research, (Marvrogenis et al, 2020). It is
distributed to subject matter expert reviewers for their feedback. Peer reviewers are
called upon to assist the journal editors in the decision making on whether the
manuscripts are put forward for publishing, (Jirschitzka, et al. 2017).
Manuscript rejection is common and of a high percentage. Although discouraging
reviewer’s comments and recommendations can be a tool to enhance the author's
innovation of ideas. Wooley and Barron, (2019) published that 62% of manuscripts
are rejected first time around and that approximately 50% of the manuscripts which
have been rejected, go on to be published within 2 years, after making adjustments
given through feedback. The reviewers’ and editors' recommendations are a key tool
in academics turning in a high quality manuscript. It is a crucial point for moving
forward to having research published. Requests to revise and resubmit should be
seen as constructive feedback enabling positive changes to be made. However, this
is dependent on the authors commitment to having their articles published. Although
it's still criticised that the peer review process is unreliable. Chibnik (2016) stated that
the method for evaluating an article varies greatly. While Hirst and Altman (2010),
looked into 116 journals finding that only 35% where given an online process of the
marking guidelines. After completing some extensive reading into Bornmanns (2011)
statistical studies and Shatz’s (2004) inquiry. It was noted that not a huge amount of
evidence has been published on this area. Though, it was suggested that guidance
tools are being used to help peer reviewers and journal editors to improve their
quality of evaluation. Every journal has a set of guidelines for evaluation: covering
topics such as credibility, research and publication ethics. An example can be found
