Does 'unbiased' equal 'peer reviewed'?
Does 'unbiased' equal 'peer reviewed'?
If ones opinion piece on evolution is 'peer reviewed' is it also unbiased? really?
Does 'unbiased' equal 'peer reviewed'?
If ones opinion piece on evolution is 'peer reviewed' is it also unbiased? really?
Comments
Unbiased is usually something that is said to cover up ones biased opinion.
Sort of like faux news and the line fair and balanced.
Why would an opinion piece be peer reviewed?
Scholarly peer review is used to ensure that an article meets certain standards before it is published in a professional journal, so that conclusions that may have an impact on the particular scholarly discipline don't slip by without examination.
Opinion pieces may have a similar impact, but are intended to be discussed after the fact.
Both may be published in professional journals, but opinion pieces can also appear in the popular press, or even on the internet with no standards at all. They really have very little to do with each other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_piece
Only research papers are peer reviewed, that doesn't include "opinion pieces".
And yeah, the scientific method makes it almost impossible to be biased towards one viewpoint when writing up the research paper. The only way you can have a bias is to fudge the results of an experiment, which would be quickly picked up during peer review anyway.
Of course, the scientist can have their own personal biases towards things, but that wouldn't be part of the actual research.
Two separate entities, peer review can show up bais. Peer review simply means the theory can be reviewed by others and the results replicated EXACTLY as outlined in the paper making the theory become accepted. Bias is a personal thing which is easily extracted from any theories put forward by the method of peer review. Simply put keeping opinion and fact separate.
No peer reviewed generally means that others in your professin, who are of good standing and reputation in that profession, have reviewed a piece of work by another practioner of your profession. They will decide of the work merits publication in one of the professions journals based on the work's originality, academic soundness, and logical line of thought. But both the author and the reviewers maybe biased. If the bias on the author's part leads to unsupportable claims or conclusions, the work will be rejected. The bias on the reviewers' part can lead to the work being rejected or held up.
No of course not - your peers are biased - all humans are. Some of your peers will like you and some not. It will not be anything to do the quality of your work.
I mark a lot of papers and I am very glad I don't actually see the writers of them because I would be even more biased than I am now - can't help making judgments based on quality of writing - grammar, punctuation and whether I can read it - some students' writing is appalling. I bend over backwards to try to be fair. That's all I can do.
Sorry to burst your bubble but don't let anyone tell you they are completely unbiased - not possible.
Mo
University Lecturer (retired).
people who go to trial have a jury of their "peers" but ironically the juror isn't supposed to know you and in fact if he DOES know you, he won't be picked as a juror.