« Voice to the voiceless | Main | "Here is my article", "great now go out there and get those interviews" »

What do you think, does this make my @$$ look fat??

Nevertheless, for all of its flaws, what Churchill said of democracy can also be said applied to peer review: it is the worst system for judging research, except for all of the other alternatives that have ever been tried. (IANS161)

I have never been one to enjoy peer-review, while I do like the feedback I recieve from my peers, I hate the immense pressure I feel to look over someone else's work. Simply because my thoughts may not be right. I may not be giving that person the correct answers. It is a huge responsibility to critique someone's work. So with that in mind why is that peer-reviewed work seems to be given the most credence. Is it because someone checked to see if you made any mistakes, when in fact they could have made several of their own? We trust opinions when they come from a credible source i.e. someone who knows what they're talking about. But even then no one will exactly interpret your work the way you do, so is it worth it? I think that perhaps it is, simply for another perspective that could open your mind, and allow you to witness your own work in a new way. However, ultimately it's up to the reader to form their own opinion despite whatever yours may be.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on November 1, 2007 10:22 PM.

The previous post in this blog was Voice to the voiceless.

The next post in this blog is "Here is my article", "great now go out there and get those interviews".

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.