Peer-reviewed journal articles are considered to be the most credible resources in different scientific topics or subjects. The information provided in such sources is always based on appropriate researches. The following paper is intended to discuss and explain what peer-reviewed articles are and how they are created.
The process of the creation of peer-reviewed articles includes the following stages:
- Literature review;
- Data Interpretation;
- Manuscript writing;
- Publication (Ferguson, Marcus, & Oransky, 2014).
Such elements of the peer-review cycle as its idea, the researching process, and peer-reviewing are considered to be the most important as they imply the development of a credible source. Without the actions mentioned above, it is impossible to provide trustworthy and reliable information (Linton, 2016). Every study is edited and reviewed by many people. There are particular differences between editors and peer-reviewers. For instance, reviewers are not familiar with the authors of the articles they evaluate, whereas editors are supposed to work with scholars to check the appropriateness of their studies’ presentations. Also, editors should decide what elements must be published or not, whereas reviewers are only allowed to give their recommendations.
The article written by students for this week was not considered to be peer-reviewed as it did not pass the verification procedure by multiple scholars and editors. As people work on their researches in classes, they might find peer-reviewed information in the local library or online sources (Rennie, 2016). These websites always specify whether the study is peer-reviewed or not.
Peer-reviewed articles should undergo the appropriate cycle that consists of ten points. The most important elements include the idea, researching process, and peer-reviewing. Students may access peer-reviewed and credible resources in libraries and some websites that specify the reliability of the presented articles.
Ferguson, C., Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2014). Publishing: The peer-review scam. Nature, 515(7528), 480-482. Web.
Linton, J. D. (2016). Improving the peer-review process: Capturing more information and enabling high-risk/high-return research. Research Policy, 45(9), 1936-1938. Web.
Rennie, D. (2016). Let’s make peer-review scientific. Nature, 535(7610), 31-33. Web.