"I don’t believe in peer review because I think it’s very distorted and as I’ve said, it’s simply a regression to the mean. I think peer review is hindering science. In fact, I think it has become a completely corrupt system."
-Sydney Brenner
Follow
@PhiloNeuroSci I guess we just trust people then?
@Adultxtraffic No, quite the opposite. Just be skeptical in general and judge by other metrics like whether mutliple studies replicate, does it stand the test of time, let many scientists weigh in publicly. Much better than an authoritative stance of 3 "experts" agree.
@PhiloNeuroSci oh thank god. Sorry when I think peer reviewed my brain automatically expects replicated studies. I guess to me there is no logic to trusting editors to be impartial.
@Adultxtraffic @PhiloNeuroSci Not trust. Other means of verifying and testing. I think e-life is experimenting with a new model of public critique and a requirement to provide raw data. So more like an on-line salon. In my experience peer review, while helpful sometimes, also entails far too much gatekeeping against new ideas.