The peer-review cycle is a time-consuming process that requires a considerable amount of effort. Some essential steps of a peer review include ideas, grants, and research. The first step- finding an interesting idea or a fresh, relevant perspective can be hard due to the abundance of research. Secondly, research can be expensive. Therefore, it is critical to find an organization that will pay the researcher for his work. Sometimes, it can be a challenge because each proposal has to go through the selection process. The most important step is conducting research. This process requires careful execution because a single mistake in data collection or calculations can affect the validity of its results. Editor- is the person who sees research first and based on the criteria such as content, creativity, contribution, and clarity he/she decides whether it will be reviewed or not. Reviewers in their turn carefully examine each step of research and its quality. For instance, they define if the study brings new ideas to old concepts, the appropriateness of used methodology, reliability of sources, and cohesion of conclusion (Lee, Sugimoto, Zhang & Cronin, 2013). Another difference is that the editor knows the author and can directly contact him, while reviewers lack this privilege, and therefore, a review is not prejudiced.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
How to identify a peer-reviewed article
Often universities offer a subscription for research databases such as Medline and PubMed for the students. Databases usually provide reliable, authentic, and peer-reviewed articles. It is easy to determine a peer-reviewed article by looking at the authority of its publisher and the author. This information is provided on the title page of an article. It mentions their expertise and what organization or university they are affiliated with. Looking at the credibility of sources on the reference page is also useful.
I chose the article “Prevalence of experiences of domestic violence among psychiatric patients: a systematic review” (Oram, Trevillion, Feder, & Howard, 2013). It was published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, which is one of the leading peer-reviewed psychiatric journals. The authors work in appropriate institutions and have other publications as well. This article also has verifiable sources. Therefore, I can determine that it was peer-reviewed by highly professional experts and non-stakeholders.
Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G. & Cronin, B. (2013). Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2-17.
Oram, S., Trevillion, K., Feder, G., & Howard, L. M. (2013). Prevalence of experiences of domestic violence among psychiatric patients: systematic review. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 202(2), 94-99. Web.