Peer Review takes a hit - 09/18/07 07:03 PM
The Wall Street Journal has an article titled, "Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted By Sloppy Analysis."
It seems like the peer review process is not all that it is made out to be. Then again, since it took 6 years for the 2000 temps to be audited even partially, this does not surprise me.
Quote:
We all make mistakes and, if you believe medical scholar John Ioannidis, scientists make more than their fair share. By his calculations, most published research findings are wrong.
...
The hotter the field of research the more likely its published findings should be viewed skeptically, he determined.
...
"We need to pay more attention to the replication of published scientific results."
...
The hotter the field of research the more likely its published findings should be viewed skeptically, he determined.
...
"We need to pay more attention to the replication of published scientific results."
It seems like the peer review process is not all that it is made out to be. Then again, since it took 6 years for the 2000 temps to be audited even partially, this does not surprise me.