<!DOCTYPE html>

<html data-programme="Research Integrity" data-course="Professional Responsibilities">

	<head>
		<title>Best practices in peer review</title>
		<meta charset="UTF-8">
		<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge">
		<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">

		<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/project.min.css">
		<link id="basic-print" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/print.min.css" disabled>
		<link id="summary-print" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/print_interactive.min.css">
	<script type="text/javascript" src="../scripts_scorm_12/SCORM_12_APIWrapper.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="../scripts_scorm_12/courseFunctions.js"></script>
</head>

	<body onLoad="javascript:Initialize();" onUnload="javascript:Terminate();">
	  
		<div id="app" v-cloak>
			<base-container
				screen-id="pro_1_50"
				current-module = "Professional Responsibilities"
				page-title = "Best practices in peer review"
				screen-time = "2"
				screen-time-period = "mins">

				<page-container>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>

							<p>Traditionally, the reliability of research has rested on two quality control mechanisms: <glossary placement="bottom" content="The act of repeating a research study to determine whether its basic findings are reproducible in alternative circumstances and situations.">replication</glossary> and <glossary placement="bottom" content="The evaluation of professional publications, grant applications and credentials by professionals of similar status to verify that the publications, grant applications and work meet professional standards.">peer review</glossary>. Replication is expensive, usually not rewarded, and in some research areas may not actually be possible (see the "Additional information" pod for further discussion of this). Therefore, researchers and society rely heavily on peer review for judgements about the quality and reliability of research &ndash; from grant review through to publication and promotion decisions.</p>

						</page-content-main>

						<page-content-sidebar>
							
							<interactive-text>
							<!-- KEY POINTS ICON START -->
							<icon-key-points></icon-key-points>
							<!-- KEY POINTS ICON END -->
							</interactive-text>
							
						</page-content-sidebar>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-sidebar>

							<!-- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION START -->
							<pod variant="b" has-modal="true">
								<pod-heading>Additional information</pod-heading> <!-- pod title -->
								<pod-content></pod-content>
								<!-- pop-up pod content -->
								<pod-modal-heading>Additional information</pod-modal-heading>
								<pod-modal-content>
									<p>Within the physical, chemical and biological sciences, replication remains important. However, as the scope of research has broadened, especially in the social sciences, complexities surrounding context, situations or shifting cultural norms have made it much harder to rely on replication. Here, robust peer review is the best way to ensure research quality.</p>
								</pod-modal-content>
							</pod>
							<!-- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION END -->

						</page-content-sidebar>

						<page-content-main>

							<h3>Best practices for peer review</h3>
							
							<p>Guidelines on best practice for peer review can be found in journals and the policies of publishers and grant-making agencies. Whatever the specific requirements for a review, researchers are expected to follow certain principles of best practice and act with integrity throughout.  </p>
							
							<instructional-text><p>Match each principle of best practice in peer review with the example of how it can be applied.</p></instructional-text>
							<instructional-text-accessible><p>In the following activity, match each principle of best practice in peer review with the example of how it can be applied. Continue on to find out if you were correct. </p></instructional-text-accessible>
						
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-wide>
							
							<!-- ACTIVITY START -->
							<matching>
								<matching-set>
									<match-left>Timely</match-left>
									<match-right>Meet review deadlines to avoid slowing down the peer-review process.</match-right>
								</matching-set>
								<matching-set>
									<match-left>Thorough</match-left>
									<match-right>Review all the information needed to provide a professional evaluation.</match-right>
								</matching-set>
								<matching-set>
									<match-left>Objective</match-left>
									<match-right>Base your review on the information presented, avoiding bias from personal preferences and relationships.</match-right>
								</matching-set>
								<matching-set>
									<match-left>Fair</match-left>
									<match-right>Apply the same standards to all reviews.</match-right>
								</matching-set>
								<matching-set>
									<match-left>Confidential</match-left>
									<match-right>Keep the information gained throughout the review process to yourself. Do not discuss or share it with others without permission, or use the information gained when conducting a review to advance your own research.</match-right>
								</matching-set>
								<matching-set>
									<match-left>Constructive</match-left>
									<match-right>Provide advice that will be beneficial to your professional colleagues and the public.  </match-right>
								</matching-set>
							</matching>
							<!-- ACTIVITY END -->
							
						</page-content-wide>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
						
							<p>Most of these best practices apply equally to other aspects of research. For peer review, objectivity and fairness take on special meaning and are particularly important. The advice you provide should reflect the overall thinking and best practices in your field of research. When you introduce your own personal views into the review, you should take care to identify them, so that those relying on the review can balance your views with the views of others.</p>
							
							<h3>Summary</h3>
							
							<p>Peer review is essential to professional self-regulation and is a collective responsibility for all researchers, wherever they are based. If you are invited to peer review the work of others, you should be timely, thorough, objective, fair, confidential and constructive.</p>
							
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
				</page-container>
			</base-container>
		</div> <!-- END content wrapper -->
		
		<!-- scripts -->
		<script src="../js/vendor.min.js"></script>
		<script src="../js/vue-components.min.js"></script>
		<script>
			new Vue({
			  el: "#app",
			  data: {},
			  mounted: function () {
				var core = document.createElement('script');
				core.src = "../js/core.min.js";
				document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(core);

				var project = document.createElement('script');
				project.src = "../js/project.min.js";
				document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(project);
			  }
			});
		</script>

	</body>
</html>