Peer review and psychological research and the economy

main aims of peer review

-to allocate research funding

-to validate the quantity and relevance of the research

-to suggest amendments or improvements

explain to allocate research funding

independent peer evaluation takes place to decide whether or not to award funding for a proposed research project-can be coordinated by gov run funding organisations

explain to validate the quality and relevance of research

all elements of research are assessed for quality and accuracy: the formulation of hypotheses, the methodology chosen, the statistical tests used and the the conclusions drawn

explain to suggest amendments or improvements

reviewers may suggest minor revisions of the work to improve the report- in extreme circumstances they may conclude the work as inappropriate for publication and should be withdrawn

describe what anonymity is

usual practice of the peer doing the reviewing remains anonymous throughout the process

describe publication bias

the tendency for journalists to want to publish significant headline grabbing findings to increase credibility-also prefer to post positive results which gives a false impression of psychology

describe burying ground breaking research

reviewers tend to be easily critical, especially of research that contradicts their own and much more favourable to research they match with

memory research into eyewitness testimony

-research shows that eyewitness memory can be affected by leading questions and post event discussions

-Loftus’s research highlights unreliability of eyewitnesses

-led to improvements in police line-ups and not solely relying on eyewitnesses

-fewer wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice

treatment for mental health conditions

-poor mental health cost £110 billion in 2022

-depression, anxiety and stress are almost half of the absences from work in GB

-treatments have been developed

-effective treatment allows people to manage conditions and return to jobs, benefiting economy