著者の身元を隠すことは,ピアレビューの質を向上させるのか? ランダム化制御試験. ランダム化制御試験. PEERの調査員たち
A C Justice1, M K Cho, M A Winker
1Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University Hospitals of Cleveland and Case Western Reserve University, Ohio 44106, USA. acj@po.cwru.edu
JAMA
|July 24, 1998
まとめ
ピアレビューを著者のアイデンティティに覆うことは,生物医学雑誌のレビューの質を向上させませんでした. この効果の欠如は,よく知られた著者を成功裏に隠蔽することの困難から生じ,盲目レビューから最も恩恵を受けるかもしれない.
科学分野:
- メディカル・ジャーナル・ピアレビュー
- 科学出版の倫理について
背景:
- 査読者の客観性は,著者の認識によって損なわれることがあります.
- 以前の単一のジャーナル研究では,著者マスクによるレビューの質の改善の可能性を示唆した.
研究 の 目的:
- 査読者を著者のアイデンティティに覆うことが,一般的に生物医学雑誌のレビューの質を向上させるかどうかを評価する.
- ピアレビューにおいて,標準的な著者マスキング技術の有効性を評価する.
主な方法:
- 主要な5つの生物医学雑誌の外部原稿レビューを含むランダム化制御試験.
- スタンダード・マスキング・プラクティスと,マスクされた/マスクされていない審査員割り当てのレビュー品質の比較.
- レビューの質は,ライターと編集者が5ポイントのライカート・スケールで評価したものです.
主要な成果:
- 仮面と非仮面のレビューの評価の質の有意な違いはありません.
- 著者隠蔽はしばしば失敗した (68%の全体的な成功率).
- マスキングの成功率は,有名な著者の手稿では低く,盲目化から最も恩恵を受ける可能性が高い.
結論:
- ピアレビューにおける現在の著者マスクの慣行は,レビューの質を明らかに改善しません.
- 有名な著者を効果的に隠蔽することの難しさは,隠蔽の潜在的な利点を否定するかもしれない.
- 強力な隠蔽戦略に関するさらなる研究が必要である.
関連する概念動画
Feedback Inhibition
Biochemical reactions are occurring constantly in cells, converting starting substances to different products, usually with the help of enzymes that speed the reactions. Without enzymes, it would take far too long for most reactions to occur to be useful to the cell!
Blind Procedures
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which child was...
Ethics in Research
Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
Deindividuation
Deindividuation is a form of social influence on an individual’s behavior such that the individual engages in unusual or non-normal behavior while in a group setting. Why? Because in these group settings, the individual no longer sees themselves as an individual anymore, disinhibiting their behavior and personal restraint.
Blinding
Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.
Halo Effect
The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...


