this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
493 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

10950 readers
2560 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] spez@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

While I have heard the term multiple times and I think it means approval from other scientists, I am not very sure about it.

[–] Evilschnuff@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes random scientists from your field do a review and an editor consolidates that into an accept/deny result with potential requirements for revision. But this often can take weeks to months since nobody actually wants to do these reviews and it’s really dependent on who you’ll get as reviewers. So the usual approach is to reapply several times over months if you think your submission is good.

[–] Smoogy@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Reapplying repeatedly is probably why no one wants to do those reviews though. Spam is annoying

[–] Smoogy@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Are you peer reviewing the process of peer review?

[–] galilette@mander.xyz 10 points 1 year ago

Resubmitting to multiple journals is not a typical (nor the "right" one however it is interpreted) strategy though (at least not in physical sciences). You'll usually ping the handling editor, who will then contact the referee on your behalf. The referee will then either "promise a report soon", or, in the event they didn't reply, the editor will find another referee. Nowadays with arxiv and such, there is usually no rush to actual publication as far as priority is concerned.

I'd also say, don't take the combative mindset as suggested in the comic. Think of it more as having some fresh pairs of eyes to check your work as well as communication (if a referee misunderstood something in your paper, chances are many readers will as well).

That's what the process should be.

In reality, especially in social sciences, it comes down to whether the "peer reviewers" agree with your point of view. Even if your point of view is bullshit and not backed up by science.

[–] weariedfae@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

This image is missing the thousands of dollars in fees shakedown at the end.