Post #3237034

2024-03-27 23:31 UTC

@nasamuffin@jorts.horse Post-publication peer review is public (often implemented as “comment” boxes) and can help judge work. Currently most journals do not make pre-publication reviews public, so they don’t help all that much assessing a publications individual findings. Studies that are read by a lay audience usually get there via journalists. Good press coverage of research already includes external opinions (the “not involved in the study” professors often quoted) - that too is public peer review. 3/4

Replies (1)

@johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org 2024-03-27 23:34

@nasamuffin@jorts.horse Of course studies also get cited directly: from court judgments and government policies to Facebook rants. A recent example are studies on abortion-inducing drugs that were cited in legal proceedings in the US. They were later retracted after researchers pointed out their (ideologically motivated) flaws. That illustrates that pre-publication peer review can fail to weed out bad work while post-publication review can be very efficient in highlighting flaws. 4/4

Open ##3237035