Peer review
Researchers have a responsibility to take part in peer review - including peer review of grant proposals, publications, and applications for ethical clearance. As much of academic inquiry is specialized, peers with similar expertise are often the best (or in some cases the only) available arbiters of quality.Magnus and Kalichman1 observe that:
- Academic integrity depends on peer review.
A published paper reflects not only on the authors of that paper, but also on the scientific community as a whole. High standards for academic work can only be maintained if scientists critically assess one another's work. - Effective peer review depends on academic integrity.
Peer review must be conducted so that better scientific work is the result. Candidates for publication, grant funding, and career advancement have a right to a timely response from competent, unbiased reviewers. - Responsible peer review is a researcher's responsibility.
By definition, peer review depends on the willingness of peers to participate as reviewers, usually without financial compensation. Participation in the research community thus involves a responsibility to share in the task of reviewing the work of peers. In addition to being an ethical responsibility, it should be noted that experience as a reviewer also has practical advantages. These include the opportunity to better understand the peer review system, to become more aware of the work of peers, and to develop lines of communication with other peer reviewers.