| Property | Value |
|---|
| rdf:type | |
| rdfs:label | - Peer Review
- Peer Review
- Peer review
- Peer Review
|
| rdfs:comment | - Peer Review is a technique used by $cientologists to insure that their studies are enough.
- A peer review is
- Note: this page provides a general account of peer review. For an introduction to the peer review process as it exists specifically in wiki publishing, see peer review (wiki).
- Note: this page provides an introduction to the peer review process as it exists in wiki publishing. For a more general account of peer review, see peer review (general). There are three stages in wiki publishing; preliminary drafts, formal peer review, and the "end stage" which is equivalent to traditional publishing of a peer reviewed article and what can happen after publishing (correction, retraction, citation).
- Peer review created by scientists who did not want to lose their jobs after developing a theory of everything. One problem was how to stop only the development of a theory of everything while still being able to do somewhat productive work (though not as productive as a theory of everything would have been, of course). The solution was to divide themselves into separate disciplines, demanding research to stay largely confined within its own discipline. To cover their tracks, they did allow limited "interdisciplinary" research, but added a clause that it all had to be approved by "experts" in all disciplines involved as a safety measure to allow enough falsifications for a theory of everything to amass. By that latter clause, peer review as we know it was born.
- Martha looked at the clock. It was almost six in the morning, and she hadn't slept all night. It was time. She turned on the computer and waited for the old thing to boot up. Her cat, Sebastian, walked over to where she sat and cozied up in her lap. She took a deep breath, and entered the web address for the Social Demographic Review. DannyK Wrote: Out of work for six months, little to no chance of further employment. One kid unemployed, again with little to no chance of employment. She never went to college, she relied on her husband's income, and she hasn't done anything with her life.
- Peer review is part of the procedure for working out if research in physical Science or social science is valid and has been round for over 300 years. Usually but not always peer review works. Basically peer review involves getting experts working in the same field and hopefully independent to review new work and agree or disagree with the result. A larger, disinterested group of scientists is more likely to notice flaws in scientific work than those who did the actual work, hopefully cronyism should be prevented. Peer reviewers decide if work is good, also if it’s original, they may recommend improvements to research.
- Peer review is part of the procedure for deciding out if research in physical Science or social science is valid and has been round for over 300 years. Usually but not always peer review works. Basically peer review involves getting experts working in the same field and hopefully independent to review new work and agree or disagree with the result. A larger, disinterested group of scientists is more likely to notice flaws in scientific work than those who did the actual work, hopefully cronyism should be prevented. Peer reviewers decide if work is good, also if it’s original, they may recommend improvements to research.
- Peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or idea]s to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish; and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Although generally considered essential to academic quality, peer review has been criticized as ineffective, slow, and misunderstood.
- Peer review is part of the procedure for working out if research in physical science or social science is valid and has been round for over 300 years. Usually but not always peer review works. Basically peer review involves getting experts working in the same field and hopefully independent to review new work and agree or disagree with the result. A larger, disinterested group of scientists is more likely to notice flaws in scientific work than those who did the actual work, hopefully cronyism should be prevented. Peer reviewers decide if work is good, also if it’s original, they may recommend improvements to research.
|
| owl:sameAs | |
| Движок | |
| Управление | |
| dcterms:subject | |
| название | |
| Рейтинг | - *ESRB: Everyone 10+
*PEGI: 12
|
| Жанр | |
| Изображение | |
| Серия | |
| Дата | |
| dbkwik:academia/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:creepy-pasta/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:fossil/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:half-life/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:uncyclopedia/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:wikiality/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:ru.halflife/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| Previous | |
| Date | |
| Platform | |
| Series | |
| Name | |
| Genre | |
| dbkwik:itlaw/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:creepypasta/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| dbkwik:atheism/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate | |
| Distribution | |
| Mode | |
| System | - PC, Mac, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360
|
| Input | - Keyboard and mouse, Xbox 360 Controller, DualShock 3
|
| Engine | |
| Developer | |
| NEXT | - Perpetual Testing Initiative
|
| Rating | - *ESRB: Everyone 10+
*CERO: A
*PEGI: 12
|
| Платформа | |
| Разработчик | |
| Режим | - Однопользовательская и кооперативная игра
|
| Локализатор | |
| abstract | - Peer Review is a technique used by $cientologists to insure that their studies are enough.
- A peer review is
- Peer review is part of the procedure for working out if research in physical science or social science is valid and has been round for over 300 years. Usually but not always peer review works. Basically peer review involves getting experts working in the same field and hopefully independent to review new work and agree or disagree with the result. A larger, disinterested group of scientists is more likely to notice flaws in scientific work than those who did the actual work, hopefully cronyism should be prevented. Peer reviewers decide if work is good, also if it’s original, they may recommend improvements to research. Whether science gets published in a good, peer reviewed journal depends on successful peer review. Getting work reviewed and repeating experiments is an important part of the scientific method.
- Note: this page provides a general account of peer review. For an introduction to the peer review process as it exists specifically in wiki publishing, see peer review (wiki).
- Martha looked at the clock. It was almost six in the morning, and she hadn't slept all night. It was time. She turned on the computer and waited for the old thing to boot up. Her cat, Sebastian, walked over to where she sat and cozied up in her lap. She took a deep breath, and entered the web address for the Social Demographic Review. As the site slowly loaded, Martha was left staring for several minutes at a picture of a young man and woman smiling in a field, surrounded by a white background. Beads of sweat were forming on her brow as the website finished loading. Martha keyed in her password, and was almost immediately taken to her page. Below a brief biography, the thread had already begun. she scanned the responses anxiously: DannyK Wrote: Out of work for six months, little to no chance of further employment. One kid unemployed, again with little to no chance of employment. She never went to college, she relied on her husband's income, and she hasn't done anything with her life. Yeah, there is no question at all. Vote: Fail. SimonJr Wrote: Really Danny? How can you be such a heartless bastard? Have you never been unemployed? Have you never known what real pain was? What the Hell is wrong with you? This woman deserves a lot better than people like you. Vote: Pass! DannyK Wrote: I have to wonder why you're even on this site Simon, and it's clear that you've never been up for review. I have been up for review, and my record speaks for itself; I have a solid work record because I made the right decisions in my life. She has nobody to blame but herself, and I'd like to remind you that this site is designed to be objective. Telltale Wrote: Simon, are you ****ing stupid? How can anybody give this deadbeat a pass? What, we should just allow people to go on collecting money from the government when they are of no use whatsoever? Would starving kids thank us for that? Get real idiot. Vote: FAIL! SimonJr: Get real? How much money have those 'starving kids' ever received? The government has set all of this up, so don't be such a tool! MichealPhD Wrote: Really now, why are we still having these debates? We all know the situation, and we all know what has to be done. There is no point in dancing around the obvious. Vote: Fail. RaymondL Wrote: Would somebody block Simon? He's being retarded. Vote: Fail. SimonJr Wrote: You can try and silence me all you want, but that doesn't change how sick and wrong this all is. DannyK Wrote: Look, if you want to talk philosophy, do it someplace that isn't a vital government service. I'm sure if you showed your 'brilliant' ideas on how to fix the world to some university, they'd love to hear your crackpot theories. Me? I fought in the last war. I KNOW what is at stake, and I doubt very much you understand that. Since you can't keep quiet, I'm requesting the moderator censor your posts. Come on, one more and we can go. I've got 120 more to get through today. RachelL Wrote: Yeah, no question. Vote: Fail MODERATOR Wrote: I see five votes for Fail. I will send out notification. Thanks to everyone who participated in this review. Martha slumped back in her chair, closed her eyes and let out a long, slow sigh. It was over. It was finally over. She petted Sebastian, who had fallen asleep in her lap. Now that it had been decided, she felt oddly at peace. It wouldn't be so bad, saying goodbye to this world. Half an hour later, there was a knock at the door.
- Peer review is part of the procedure for working out if research in physical Science or social science is valid and has been round for over 300 years. Usually but not always peer review works. Basically peer review involves getting experts working in the same field and hopefully independent to review new work and agree or disagree with the result. A larger, disinterested group of scientists is more likely to notice flaws in scientific work than those who did the actual work, hopefully cronyism should be prevented. Peer reviewers decide if work is good, also if it’s original, they may recommend improvements to research. Whether science gets published in a good, peer reviewed journal depends on successful peer review. Getting work reviewed and repeating experiments is an important part of the Scientific method.
- Peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or idea]s to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish; and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Although generally considered essential to academic quality, peer review has been criticized as ineffective, slow, and misunderstood. Image:Mantell's Iguanodon restoration.jpg This article is a . You can help My English Wiki by expanding it.
- Peer review created by scientists who did not want to lose their jobs after developing a theory of everything. One problem was how to stop only the development of a theory of everything while still being able to do somewhat productive work (though not as productive as a theory of everything would have been, of course). The solution was to divide themselves into separate disciplines, demanding research to stay largely confined within its own discipline. To cover their tracks, they did allow limited "interdisciplinary" research, but added a clause that it all had to be approved by "experts" in all disciplines involved as a safety measure to allow enough falsifications for a theory of everything to amass. By that latter clause, peer review as we know it was born. The problem remained, however, to explain why the progress towards more unified theories had stagnated. The official line created was to claim that the costs of science increase. The scientists were initially afraid that someone would eventually realize that the continuing progress of refining existing theories and their applications did not support the claim of increased costs, and that a theory of everything would make so many predictions it would ensure that some of them were cheap to test (a guarantee not enjoyed by refinings of existing theories). Despite this, the scientists decided that it was better to do something to save their jobs than to do nothing. Eventually they were also calmed down by all the stupid entertainment and election campaigns dumbing people down and decreasing the risk of anyone being smart enough to find out.
- Peer review is part of the procedure for deciding out if research in physical Science or social science is valid and has been round for over 300 years. Usually but not always peer review works. Basically peer review involves getting experts working in the same field and hopefully independent to review new work and agree or disagree with the result. A larger, disinterested group of scientists is more likely to notice flaws in scientific work than those who did the actual work, hopefully cronyism should be prevented. Peer reviewers decide if work is good, also if it’s original, they may recommend improvements to research. Whether science gets published in a good, peer reviewed journal depends on successful peer review. Getting work reviewed and repeating experiments is an important part of the Scientific method.
- Note: this page provides an introduction to the peer review process as it exists in wiki publishing. For a more general account of peer review, see peer review (general). There are three stages in wiki publishing; preliminary drafts, formal peer review, and the "end stage" which is equivalent to traditional publishing of a peer reviewed article and what can happen after publishing (correction, retraction, citation).
|
