25th November 2010, 04:00 PM
vulpes Wrote:Journal articles for national journals are ususally peer reviewed. I always pass on reports with any scientific content to the EH Science Advisor who would consult with other experts as necessary on this content.The difference, in my experience, is that peer review is meant to be an anonymous process. The reviewer does not know whose article they are reviewing and the reviewee does not know who is reviewing it. The intent is to maintain impartiality. As such, curators, to whom one submits a report, should not be reviewing the report. They should instead act as an intermediary between reviewer and reviewee if we are to adopt peer review of reports. Any other approach leaves the system open to criticism for potential bias. You also need to make sure that the person reviewing the report is recognised as an authority in the subject area. How do you ensure that and how large a pool of people will that leave you to undertake reviews?
'Reality,' sa molesworth 2, 'is so unspeakably sordid it make me shudder.'