Peer Review: Motivations, Strengths, Weaknesses, Biases, And Ways To Address Them - An Essay.

The vetting of new ideas and knowledge from research is primarily through the process of peer review and eventual publication. Describe what this process involves and the motivations to participate from all perspectives (i.e., the author, reviewer, editor, the research community, and the public), the strengths, weaknesses, and biases at each step and for each group, and discuss the ways in which it may be improved to address the weaknesses and biases you highlight. For each solution to a weakness or bias you propose, are there any unintended consequences or perverse incentives that might occur? If so, how will you mitigate those? You must use examples to illustrate your points and arguments. Make reference to the literature around peer review as needed. Your answer should be approximately 1500 words (not including references),typed, double-spaced, with citations as needed. 

In today’s world, ‘fake news’ is a term used and abused by all parties. An area of research that is susceptible to this notion of fake news is climate change. Find at least four stories on-line from news media (with two from Canada, and two from outside Canada) that provide different points of view with regards to the same aspect of climate change (for example, tropical forest deforestation, sea ice melting, changes in wildlife, wildfires, weather, etc.). Critique the articles based on the idea of ‘fake news’.

For instance, how do they address the issue and are they ‘correct’. In your response to this part of the exam, answer the following questions: What is ‘truth’? Based on your reading (of the news stories and related journal articles), can the truth be defined for this aspect of climate change? How do validity and reliability play a role in the truth of the aspect of climate change? In your answer, provide specific information on the types of validity and reliability that apply. Use original peer-reviewed journal articles to support your claims/arguments. Your answer should be approximately 1500 words (not including references), typed, double-spaced with proper citations as needed.

Motivations to Participate from Different Perspectives

1. A process of Peer Review and Publication

Publishing emerged for the purpose of sharing and vetting of ideas (Bornmann and Daniel, 201). As in earlier times, manuscripts could be shared only amongst a select few. Also earlier, there was limited scope to edit manuscripts and get appropriate feedback on the same. Printing allows ease of sharing of knowledge since the 15^th centuries. History in development depicts, forming of the Royal Society of London in 1662 for improvisation of Natural Knowledge, in the year 1752 a more formalized article review procedure came into existence (Sampson et al, 101).

The process of peer review and publishing includes ways in which papers are vetted by several experts prior to their publishing. It includes an unspoken duty of the researcher to vet their publication through peer review. The process of peer review is central to publishing as it helps validate a research. It allows establishing a method through which an article can be evaluated. The process of peer review allows enhancing networking possibilities within the research communities.

The process of peer review is central to scientific communication and for research validation (Fox and Owen, 115). The process of peer review encompasses article submission, then evaluating if the article meets basic criteria, through the initial screening. In case the article does not meet criteria, it is returned and in the case accepted then it is sent across to the second tier of the reviewer. After the article passes through this stage, then it either goes to another reviewer if rejected or goes to a reviewer for checking language, grammar and the author revises the article. The article goes for another stage of reviewing before it is published. The diagram below depicts the process of peer review in detail. Thus, the process of publishing includes printing an article once peer review on it has already been conducted.        

Motivations to participate from all perspectives

The future of scientific research is under strain for misinformation being published. The motivation behind the author of an article in getting his article peer reviewed is to validate his research. An author's findings need to be validated before it can be allowed for transferability. Reviewer's motivation in undertaking peer review is to analyze the impact of the paper on the society as a whole and hence invalidating the paper (Lee et al, 90).

Peer-review might allow new insights into the area of research undertaken and it is considered a contribution made to the profession. An editor’s benefit in peer-reviewing of an article is a contribution to the profession and can benefit career advancements. The research community through peer review gets to critically analyze new areas of research and in existing research areas. Public motivation in peer-review is that it directly gets the benefits of a new finding.  

Strengths, weaknesses, and biases at each step and for each group

The strength of the author through peer review is that once his or her works get validated then the article goes on for publishing. Such publications act to benefit the career of the author once validated. The author’s original work can be used by other author’s in case the work has been validated. Weaknesses reviewing an author’s work include rejection of the article, finding several flaws with the works of the author are some factors, which can deter career of the author (De Vries, Marschall and Stein, 204).

Strengths, Weaknesses, and Biases at Each Step and for Each Group

The author’s work might suffer from several biases, which is dependent upon the understanding of the author. The reviewers have several strengths in the process of review as they are able to validate a number of works. Weaknesses include validating a work that is not authentic or not acceptable. The reviewer might reject or accept a work based on his or her personal biases. The editor's strength in reviewing of a work is in allowing publication of a work. The weakness of an editor in reviewing a work is in passing a work that is inappropriate, due to several factors. Time constraint is another major weakness faced by editors in reviewing of author's original works.

An editor might suffer from several biases, depending upon a personal relationship with the author, lack of time and pressure to pass an article forcibly. The research community’s strength is in passing several authentic and new work and showing the author's direction in research work. The research community plays a pivotal role in providing direction for future research works.

Weaknesses of the research community in undertaking a peer review article is not able to get an article according to the research direction that it decided for a particular field or domain of study. The research community might suffer from biases by not passing an article, which does not sufficiently meet research direction as provided. The public might have the strength in undertaking a peer review by reflecting their acceptation or rejection of a work. Weaknesses faced by the public might in peer review are accepting a work as original that has not been reviewed appropriately. The public might feel biased in accepting a work that is posed in contradiction to works that are currently available.  

Ways in which it may be improved to address the weaknesses and biases you highlight

In order to overcome the several weaknesses and biases that are faced by each group in peer-reviewed improvement has to be attained. In order to overcome the weakness faced by the author, he or she needs to undertake an appropriate and thorough review of his own article. The author needs to undertake repeated grammatical, spelling and sentence structure checks such that the article can easily be accepted (Lee, et al, 310). The author needs to allocate time in writing the article such that he can repeatedly review the article prior to final submission.

The author will need to review past works in the domain with current work, this will allow the author to overcome any biases in his understanding of the subject. The reviewer needs to assign sufficient time such that he is able to fully analyze and validate the article thoroughly. A reviewer will need to overcome any personal biases that he faces such that he is able to contribute to the research problem or article’s findings appropriately. Personal biases that need to be overcome by the reviewer will be overcome, once he is able to overcome all personal biases and dedicate appropriate time towards the article.

Ways to Improve Peer Review

The editor’s weakness in passing an author’s work can be overcome if he is able to dedicate sufficient time to review. The editor also needs to check for authenticity and appropriateness of the work. For overcoming biases faced by the editor, he needs to not consider personal relation with the author and go ahead with the article. He needs to also check for research direction that has been undertaken in the scope of the current study.

In order to overcome the weakness of the research community, the author's work needs to be validated according to the future direction of research that has been undertaken. Biases of the research community can be overcome by providing the future direction in which a research work is to be undertaken. The public's weaknesses can be overcome by providing contrary work that opposes the findings of the current study. Biases of the current study can be overcome, by discussing contrary works when undertaking a discussion of the current work.          

 Unintended consequences or perverse incentives that might occur for each solution to a weakness or bias and mitigating them

Unintended consequences might arise in case of a solution arising from weakness or biases for each group in peer review. The consequence of the author publishing a work that is unbiased or not properly evaluated can lead to an impact on the future research direction. In medical publications, a wrong entry might lead to wrongful information being passed over to the public for usage.

The example in the case of the influenza vaccine, findings from several researchers did not indicate any significant impact after taking the vaccine, especially in infants and aged population (Bornmann, 540). These findings affected millions in the UK during winter as healthcare practitioner were not able to implement a decision. The impact from reviewer's biases or weakness can lead to a wrong article been published. If a reviewer is not able to allocate sufficient time towards reviewing of an article. A reviewer will need to overcome personal biases and weaknesses and consider the greater good that an article can create. Any bias can underestimate findings for a particular study; this might lead to a reduction in the efficacy of the study.

An editor's weakness or bias can create a tremendous impact on the overall efficacy for the entire findings of a study. A good study can get rejected while an unfruitful research work might get published. It might have an effect on the author’s career. The research community’s weakness or bias has to be overcome such that impact on the future direction of research can be ascertained. For example, a research committee might decide to publish research in a specific domain and totally ignore work in a required area.

This might lead to impacting the overall benefits arising from a particular paper's contribution. The research committee not approving the study in a particular field will lead to an impact on the overall domain of research activity. In case the public is unable to overcome its weakness and biases, it might lead to ignoring of a useful research work and hence ignoring progress. The public need to be open regarding developments that are taking place in the current field of research activities and have a broader perspective to accept a research work.   

2. Four stories online from news media with regards to the climate change sea ice melting based on the idea of ‘fake news’.

Climatic change has been a leading topic for centuries now, with increasing global temperatures. Canadian news CBC reports that warm water pockets 50 meters below Canadian Basin are melting significant ice after release. The news publishes findings as published by Sciences Advances, which is by researchers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Yale University since the past 30 years. The study reports a basic presentation in the Arctic Ocean, which is present in the north of Alaska and in Yukon and Northwest Territories.

Mary-Louise Timmermans reports that researchers in the Arctic Ocean deploy marine sensors in the Canadian basin for understanding depletion in ice sheets. The news reports that warm water floats above cold water generally, but this does not happen in basic as it is insulated and saltiness makes it difficult to float. Therefore, this leads to fresh cold water appearing near the sea ice. Warm water coming from edges of the basic like Northern Chukchi Sea leaves lots of open water exposed to sun rays, which causes further ice melting. This news report publishes the study in a scientific manner, with evidence from published sources.

Canadian News, the Guardian reports that Canada's high Arctic glaciers are facing the adverse situation and are at risks from disappearance. This study reveals the shrinking glaciers in the northernmost island. The satellite imagery shows changing sizes of over 1,700 glaciers in northern Ellesmere Island in the period 1999 and 2005. This article bases its findings from NASA’s satellite images and then includes a descriptive analysis. Non-Canadian news, the Washington Post reports that the Arctic Ocean has lost 95% of its ice. The findings reveal that at such pace, ice melting would significantly contribute to global warming with the top of the world being morphed.

The news analyses implications for such ice depletion on animals such as polar bears and walruses, also on the human life. The study reveals that more young the ice is, it becomes thin easily, as per findings by Don Perovich, scientists at Dartmouth. In case Arctic experiences ice-free summers, then there is a risk to the planet, warming up more. As the dark waters in the ocean will absorb vast amounts of solar heating. The news makes use of images to support its report and findings as published. Non-Canadian news, the Economic times reveals that the Arctic sea's ice decline is gradually slower. There has been an increase in global warming and climatic change, which has doubled the pace of rising seawater. This news makes use of recent data to report its findings.             

Truth defined for this aspect of climate change

The truth can easily be understood from an increasing number of publications and recent studies in climatic change. There have been researchers around the globe, which reflects increasing global temperatures and melting of ice near the Arctic region. Depletion of glaciers and ice sheets has been noted globally (Turner, et al, 96). NASA has published several satellite images to depict the depletion in ice layers. Scientists say that the Arctic has begun to convert during Summer, as the planet is heated. Polish climate negotiators are working to reach a global consensus on how to deal with climate change. NASA’s scientists participated in the Operation Ice Bridge mission in the polar regions to deal with climatic change.

The floating sheets of ice were totally broken in the last month, and it is now right to freeze again. Scientists believe that a strange wind of causation prevents this event from being a few hundred kilometers south of the North Pole. The decomposition, however, can only be another sign of increasing the weakness of the oldest ice sheets (Moore, et al, 112). Studies about the ice age reduction in the Arctic show a more visible aspect of dramatic changes in the region. It is clearly visible, can be seen directly by satellite, and the region is really in sharp decline. However, the loss of old, dense and reduction in total volume is even more important and perhaps more important.

It cannot provide the stability of the ice system in the Arctic Ocean if it does not grow until next year. Scientists have been studying reducing glaciers and rising sea levels since a prolonged period now. There is a magnitude of studies which can support findings from the above news reports. Climatologists have been regularly cautioning regarding the devastating impact that could be caused by increasing sea levels and depletion of ocean ice (Kwok, et al, 220). All the news reported are truth and none can be regarded as false claims.

       Validity and reliability play a role in the truth of the aspect of climate change

A study will need to be established by means of validity and reliability of results. For the news on climatic change, similar validity and reliability tests have to be conducted such that findings from the several news can be considered true and not fake. Validity and reliability have a tremendous impact on the issue of climate change as the impact of these studies are tremendous in nature. Climatic change impacts greater sphere of life and creates an impact on the general public and population, along with its impact in the animal world. In absence of a test for validity and reliability, such studies cannot be conducted further, meaning transferability cannot be extended. Moreover, such studies impact cannot be considered. Scope for improvisation or reversing the impact of global warming can be determined from such studies conducted in the domain.

In order to test for validity in climatic change, there are several areas that need to be examined. Test questions need to be inspected for ensuring content validity to see whether the study meets the criteria of research. Once content validity is established, then criterion-related validity needs to be examined. Criterion-related validity evidence is a measure which ensures the legitimacy of a new solution towards the proposed challenge. In this climatic change research, a measure of depletion of ice levels in terms of area, rising sea levels in terms of volume and rising temperatures in terms of degree centigrade has to be undertaken.

Test-based validity has to be conducted by re-testing of results found. NASA’s satellite images, rising temperatures, depleting ice sheets and increasing sea-levels are all indicators that can establish the results from climatic change through re-test measures. Alternative forms of evidence are also present which provide equivalent findings for the study. A number of supporting study to the current study indicates the validity of findings from climatic change. In order to test for internal consistency, each of the news is supported by several background work or articles that are from world-famous universities.             

Reliability criterion for climatic change has to be established by means of inter-rater or inter-observer reliability, test-retest reliability, parallel-forms reliability, and internal consistency reliability. In order to assess the news findings for climatic change inter-rater or inter-observer reliability can be used for assessing the degree with which the different raters or observers provide consistent estimates regarding the phenomenon. In the current study, it can be seen that a number of studies have been conducted, which can support findings from the study. Test-retest reliability is used in assessing the consistency of a measure from one time to another.

The study in climatic change has been taking place from the last few decades to indicate the reliability of the outcome. The study in climatic change, especially in depletion of ice-sheet, has been taking place since a decade or more now. There are hence a number of time-bound studies that can establish findings for the news. Parallel-forms of reliability can be established in case there are similar studies showing similar results. The study related to climatic change has several parallel forms of study as discussed above to establish its findings.                 

Bornmann, Lutz, and Hans?Dieter Daniel. "The effectiveness of the peer review process: Inter?referee agreement and predictive validity of manuscript refereeing at Angewandte Chemie." Angewandte Chemie International Edition 47.38 (2008): 7173-7178.

Bornmann, Lutz. "Scientific peer review." Annual review of information science and technology 45.1 (2011): 197-245.

De Vries, Dennis R., Elizabeth A. Marschall, and Roy A. Stein. "Exploring the peer review process: what is it, does it work, and can it be improved?." Fisheries 34.6 (2009): 270-279.

Economic Times [Dec, 2018]. Arctic sea ice decline slows down temporarily: Nasa. Accessed on 15^th December 2018, from <https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/environment/global-warming/arctic-sea-ice-decline-slows-down-temporarily-nasa/articleshow/67011555.cms>

Fox, Jeremy, and Owen L. Petchey. "Pubcreds: fixing the peer review process by “privatizing” the reviewer commons." The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 91.3 (2010): 325-333.

Kassam, A. [July, 2018]. Canada’s high Arctic glaciers at risk of disappearing completely, study finds. Accessed on 15^th December 2018, from <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/18/canadas-high-arctic-glaciers-at-risk-of-disappearing-completely-study-finds>

Kwok, R., et al. "Thinning and volume loss of the Arctic Ocean sea ice cover: 2003–2008." Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 114.C7 (2009).

Lee, Carole J., et al. "Bias in peer review." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology64.1 (2013): 2-17.

Mooney, C. [Dec, 2018]. The Arctic Ocean has lost 95 percent of its oldest ice – a startling sign of what’s to come. Accessed on 15^th December 2018, from < https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/11/arctic-is-even-worse-shape-than-you-realize/?utm_term=.6860054cefd0>

Moore, Christopher W., et al. "Convective forcing of mercury and ozone in the Arctic boundary layer induced by leads in sea ice." Nature 506.7486 (2014): 81.

Sampson, Margaret, et al. "An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies." Journal of clinical epidemiology 62.9 (2009): 944-952.

Toth, K. [August, 2018]. Warm water under Arctic ice a ‘ticking time bomb,’ researcher says. Accessed on 15^th December 2018, from <https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/sea-ice-warm-layer-1.4803195>

Turner, John, et al. "Non?annular atmospheric circulation change induced by stratospheric ozone depletion and its role in the recent increase of Antarctic sea ice extent." Geophysical Research Letters 36.8 (2009).