Home | Site map | Elsevier websites | Alerts
Elsevier
Product information search
Search all Elsevier sites
Search
Advanced Product Search
Go to Elsevier home page
SiteStat.jsp
PEER REVIEW

Peer Review Process

Peer review is the process of engaging substantive experts to read and comment on new research in the fields in which they study in order to validate and certify that research.

Peer review (known as refereeing in some areas) is an essential dividing line for judging what is scientific and what is speculation. The process screens article submissions and requires that authors meet the standards of their discipline and achieve scientific objectivity. This means that science is more than just another opinion. More about peer review

What People Say...

“Peer review is the most potent way of separating false from true claims. It enables experts who have an interest in the relevant area, but not a vested interest in the narrow sense, to look critically at the methods and findings of their fellow scientists. The approach is transparent and has to satisfy objective criteria of fairness. Without peer review, it is not possible for the public to know what is mere opinion and what is underpinned by good research; consequently charlatans and dubious findings are given as much of a hearing as the well-founded views of reputable scientists.”
Professor Raymond Tallis, University of Manchester; author of Hippocratic Oath: Medicine and its Discontents

“Peer review is what makes science scientific. Although no human system can ever be perfect, peer review is the best system we have for ensuring the reliability of scientific findings. The public should always ask: “Is it – or isn’t it?””
Dr Ted Nield, The Geological Society of London


Peer Review Process

The Peer Review Process

Full Size

What If There Was No Peer Review Process?

Many of the research claims we read in newspapers and magazines, find on the Internet, or hear on television and the radio are not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Many reported findings, such as claims about “wonder cures” and “new dangers” never amount to anything.  Find out more

“Peer review is to science what democracy is to politics. It’s not the most efficient mechanism, but it’s the least corruptible.” Peter Lachmann, 2002

  
I don’t know what to believe...
Peer Review and the Acceptance of New Scientific Ideas
"Is Peer Review in Crisis?" by Adrian Mulligan, Perspectives in Publishing, August 2004.
Printer-friendly version   Printer-friendly version
 Home | Site map | Privacy policy | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | A Reed Elsevier company
 Copyright © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.