Prompt: Describe the process of peer review to someone who does not frequently read scientific articles. In your response, consider the pros and cons of peer review and how that might impact the credibility of the results that come from that scientific article.
Response: Peer review is the process of having a colleague, who typically studies the same subject as the author, read a scientific article that the author wrote. This person carefully takes into consideration of what the person is writing about and also makes sure to check the validity of what the author is saying. They comment on various aspects of the paper such as clarity, use of references, and the thesis of the overall paper.
A pro of having someone do peer review is that you get an outside perspective on your paper, and they can see things that you do not. They also can make suggestions as for what to add or subtract from the paper that are not necessary that the author wasn’t sure about.
A con of having someone do peer review is that the author and them might not always see to eye to eye, or the peer reviewer might not be as educated. Additionally, peer reviewers might not always do a great job and therefore can give you feedback that isn’t actually true.
This could impact the credibility of the paper if the author listens to bad advice or if they simply follow everything the peer reviewers says to do because the author no longer cares, or does not have appropriate confidence in their writing.