CLPEX Chat Board

Thought this might be of interest to somebody. As a scientist myself this reminds me that not even I, as someone who knows about bias etc can be immune from it. It also alludes to the need for us all to be careful about how we design and prepare experiments and how we engage in peer review. Food for thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.j ... ers119.xml

No one is exempt from bias. By recognizing and admitting that fact, we can progressively approach the elimination of most of it. The scientific process of publication takes advantage of the selfishness of scientists by making other (competitive) scientists aware of ongoing research and discoveries, and giving upcoming and experienced scientists opportunity to establish their own credibility by showing flaws in the research.

If science wasn't ultimately accurate, we wouldn't have microchips and rocket ships, computers and space stations. It can be a slow, sloppy process, but truth wins out eventually.

Dave,

Did we read the same article? I didn’t see anything that mentioned that we’re all susceptible to bias.

The article I read indicated that scientific peer review is not strictly driven by truth or knowledge, rather by personal agendas associated with name recognition, prestige, or money. Perhaps it could be summarized as saying that even the scientific community is not immune to losing their integrity to get what they want.

What I found funny was that while this author is bashing scientists for having personal agendas, at the end of this article we find out that this author has a personal agenda of his own, he’s really promoting the sale of a new book that’s out.

Michele, yes, I should qualify, I was drawing meaning from the article which to me indicates that the need for an agenda to self seek, as well as motivation to succeed and be the first is in itself bias. I hope that clarifies my point.

Dave,

Of course you know more about bias than I do, so you're probably right.

I always thought that 'people with agendas' was a difference between being objective and subjective, where as bias had more of a unconscious or unintentional quality to do.

Either way, I was just teasing you.

There are a number of articles on the web that complain about peer review of journal articles. I believe I have posted some snippets from some of them in the past.

I will look again to see if I can find them.

Here is a site that has 22 articles on peer reveiw and is from the Web Site Nature. Some of the articles are not too flattering.

http://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview ... index.html