Climate Change Culture Freedom Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Science Skepticism

Sounds Familiar? Clique of Reviewers, Asinine Editors Stifle Scientific Research

And so we learn that the issue of having major scientific publications rely way too much on the biased opinion of a restricted number of self-appointed “experts” apparently working together to promote their own good selves rather than to advance knowledge, is not confined to climate research alone:

Journal stem cell work ‘blocked’ by Pallab Ghosh, Science correspondent, BBC News

Stem cell experts say they believe a small group of scientists is effectively vetoing high quality science from publication in journals.

[…] Professor Lovell-Badge [from the National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR)] said: “It’s turning things into a clique where only papers that satisfy this select group of a few reviewers who think of themselves as very important people in the field is published.

You can get a lot of hype over a paper published on stem cell research that’s actually a minimal advance in knowledge whereas the poor person that is doing beautiful research that is not catching the eye of the editor, you don’t get to hear about that, even though it could be the world changing piece of research.

[…] These kinds of allegations are not new and not confined to stem cell research. But professors [Austin] Smith [of University of Cambridge] and Lovell-Badge believe that the problem has become particularly acute in their field of research recently for two reasons.

Firstly, research grants and career progression are now determined almost entirely by whether a scientist gets published in a major research journal. Secondly, in stem cell science, hundreds of millions of pounds are available for research – and so there is a greater temptation for those that want the money to behave unscrupulously.

[…] Even if research is not being deliberately stifled, high quality work is being overlooked as an “accidental consequence of journal editors relying too much on the word of a small number of individuals“, according to Professor Lovell-Badge.

[…] One of the main reasons for this, according to Professor Smith, is that journals are in competition. Editors have become dependent on favoured experts who both review other people’s stem cell research and submit their own papers to the journal. If the editor offends these experts, they may lose future papers to a rival. This is leading to the journals publishing mediocre science, according to Professor Lovell-Badge.[…]

Curiously, the above is getting plenty of air time on BBC’s Radio4’s flagship programme, “Today”. Of course there’s some attempt at mimimizing the issue…on my part, I strongly believe that one of the main issues is about Editors getting their personal biases in the way. They should become more “publishing executives” rather than “unquestionable super-reviewers”: otherwise, the future of science will be a load of hyped rubbish.

0 replies on “Sounds Familiar? Clique of Reviewers, Asinine Editors Stifle Scientific Research”

Very informative and interesting article. Thanks for sharing I have learned alot!

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? I heard Pallab Ghosh on the radio at around 6:30 this morning and he was asked the DIRECT QUESTION whether this was occuring in any other field, and he did not mention Climategate, nor is the connection made on his piece on the BBC website. An honest correspondent would have said that such charges are currently under investigation in the UK parliament with regard to The Team involved in the Climategate scandal! This just goes to prove that the BBC is trying to ‘hold the line’ and DELIBERATELY not keep its listeners/viewers/readers informed.

I don’t know whether you heard Roger Harrabin on the radio over the weekend – he was trotting out all the (rotten) planks of AGW, and how all the Climategate, Glaciergate, Amazongate revelations were nothing. Of course, his argument was fallacious. It was as follows (I kid you not, find it and hear it on ‘listen again’!): a) we know that CO2 traps heat, it was demonstrated over 150 years ago. b) the world is warmer than it was 150 years ago. c) therefore CO2 has caused the warming. With logic like that, I can’t see how Harrabin cannot be ashamed to show his face. Does he take us all for fools?

Leave a Reply - Lascia un commento

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.