This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
helenS · 36-40, F
The peer review system is quite reliable. Each paper is checked by experts in the field, prior to publication. It's not easy for crackpots to get a paper accepted.
Yes but it takes a very long time and hardly anyone goes back to them after the initial findings are put to the public unless it's a topic of popular interest.@helenS
helenS · 36-40, F
@Master5dad Typically it takes three months, and one or two revisions. The number of citations of a paper varies greatly.
Would it help if we made it to where it's not published to the public until after it's been peer reviewed @helenS
helenS · 36-40, F
@Master5dad I think that's the usual way it is. A scientist who talks to the public before his paper is accepted - that's dishonest. I don't think his community would accept that.
I don't know much past a certain part but seem to have faith in the current system but is there nothing we can do to improve it?@helenS
helenS · 36-40, F
@Master5dad I really have no idea what to improve. Being a member of a scientific community is pretty tough. You have to be the best. I left science because it was too hard for me.
Wow that sounds very brutal and competitive but I guess what you want is the absolute best @helenS
SW-User
@helenS Yeah, it's brutal, I don't know if a lot of people know what it takes to be a professor.
helenS · 36-40, F
@SW-User The whole thing starts getting really brutal once you've become a postdoc. Dog eat dog.
SW-User
@helenS My father is professor emeritus of biology and I saw all this growing up, which is why I decided to work in industry instead. You have to really want it.