Please remember to send me (@JessL) three critically literate tweets - you want to show me how you're engaging with Pamela's lecture content.
Lecture 14 peer review
View more presentations from Jessica Laccetti.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Lecture 14: Peer Review
Today's lecture is brought to you by the letters ALES and by Pamela! She will be guest lecturing on the very important subject of peer-review (which we've already been talking about).
Please remember to send me (@JessL) three critically literate tweets - you want to show me how you're engaging with Pamela's lecture content.
Please remember to send me (@JessL) three critically literate tweets - you want to show me how you're engaging with Pamela's lecture content.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Such a great lecture today! It showed a side to research that I never would have considered. It will allow me to make more critical decisions about the research that I will use and generate in the future!
ReplyDeleteTo start, I thought Pamela was a very good public speaker! I also enjoyed her presentation on the Peer-Review process. It highlighted the specific steps that go along with reviewing an article as well as some of the ethical concerns and places where the review process needs some tweaking or improving! This would have been extremely helpful in my first year when doing lab reports in those general science classes!
ReplyDeleteThis lecture made me very aware that yes there are many papers out there to pull information from, however this is only 10% of the papers being written. Its scary to think we are not always getting all the information. As humans I understand we do not like failure, so skewing view points and outcomes to show a more "positive" light from our work is unprofessional and just wrong. Because even if your test or research is does not support your hypothesis then you proved that under these conditions of study your hypothesis is incorrect and your ideas need to go in a new direction.
ReplyDeleteThanks
Becky
As students studying science in University, most of us are aware that what is published for the general public, popular press, is often skewed by the media and manipulated to be what is least offensive or "scary" for their audience. What I didn't know prior to today was the process of how the scientific journal articles we read come to be. The fact that 90% of possible articles about research are rejected and only ~50% of the statistical errors are identified is something we must keep in mind. If something is written by someone with numerous designations behind their name and is peer reviewed, we must still be wary and ask intelligent questions regarding their work before we blindly accept what they say.
ReplyDeleteThis was a great lecture that I really wish I would have had in my first year! Lots of great tips, including looking at review articles to find relevant peer-reviewed articles, paying attention to the authors and journals, and using PubMed and other databases to find articles. Finding the right combination of keywords and search criteria can also be a challenge! The distinction between peer-reviewed articles and popular press is also important to note. So many times I have met people that take magazine articles for 100% fact, without realizing that those articles are subject to interpretation.
ReplyDeleteI was shocked that only 10% of articles are actually published, and how heavily reviewers lean towards positive results. Makes you wonder how much information readers may be missing out on, like the example Pam gave about her transgenic mouse experience. I'm glad there's an inclination towards changing the peer-review system, perhaps towards a more "open" concept as discussed in the article.
It was great to have this lecture last week. I wish I was in this faculty from my first year and had the opportunity to be in a course like this. I've had to learn the hard way from peer review articles to poster presentations. It's been a great refresher and I have learned some incredible new things. It certainly has given me more confidence in my presentation abilities thus far, I'm looking forward to the rest of the semester and putting these skills to use. Thanks to you all.
ReplyDeleteI generally disagree with this personality test, my results were kind of accurate, but I believe that many of the questions were fairly general and that many people would answer in similar ways, even though they are very different people, which makes me question the validity and accuracy of a test such as this one. I also believe that there should be a continuum of possible answers (i.e. never, almost never, sometimes, almost always, always) because that gives more options and would possibly have the test be more accurate in it's findings.
ReplyDeleteThis was a lecture filled with some great information. There were definitely some points made that I did not know before but as many students have said above, this would have been extremely helpful in first year of studies. It was interesting to see the lengthy process articles go through to be deemed peer reviewed as it is great to appreciate and acknowledge the process that is such a huge part of university research. I also found it helpful to note that review in general is an evolving process that is subjected to quality control and continual improvement.
ReplyDelete