Practice question · Multiple choice
A finding is peer-reviewed and published in a good journal. What has that process actually established?
Hints
- Ask what a reviewer physically receives, and what they do not.
- Reviewers almost never see the raw data. What can they check?
Show the answer
B. That two or three experts saw no obvious fatal flaw
Why
Reviewers read a manuscript. They rarely see raw data, never rerun the analysis, and cannot detect fabrication, so the filter catches obvious flaws and little else. That is why replication rather than publication is what settles a finding, and why 'peer-reviewed' is a floor rather than a verdict.
Practise Reporting Research Findings
The app has 5 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Psychology I is free to start.
More questions on Reporting Research Findings
- Sort each practice by whether it tends to worsen or to counter publication-related bias.
- Enough detail for an independent replication belongs in the Results section.
- Select every statement that is TRUE about reporting research.
- A researcher collects data, notices an unexpected pattern, and publishes it as the hypothesis the study set…
- Well-conducted studies finding nothing are much less likely to be published than studies finding an effect.…
- Order the standard APA report sections as they appear in a paper.