2 points | by leephillips 12 hours ago
2 comments
What's the point of peer reviews if such errors are not detected?
As a reviewer I try to judge whether a paper is scientifically relevant, appropriate for the journal, advances the field, credits previous work, and is not obviously wrong. No reviewer can guarantee that there are no mistakes.
What's the point of peer reviews if such errors are not detected?
As a reviewer I try to judge whether a paper is scientifically relevant, appropriate for the journal, advances the field, credits previous work, and is not obviously wrong. No reviewer can guarantee that there are no mistakes.