Peer review versus editorial review and their role in innovative science

Scientific Hypotheses: Writing, Promoting, and Predicting Implications

Scientific hypotheses are essential for progress in rapidly developing academic disciplines. Proposing new ideas and hypotheses require thorough analyses of evidence-based data and predictions of the implications. One of the main concerns relates to the ethical implications of the generated hypotheses. The authors may need to outline potential benefits and limitations of their suggestions and target widely visible publication outlets to ignite discussion by experts and start testing the hypotheses. Not many publication outlets are currently welcoming hypotheses and unconventional ideas that may open gates to criticism and conservative remarks. A few scholarly journals guide the authors on how to structure hypotheses. Reflecting on general and specific issues around the subject matter is often recommended for drafting a well-structured hypothesis article. An analysis of influential hypotheses, presented in this article, particularly Strachan's hygiene hypothesis with global implications in the field of immunology and allergy, points to the need for properly interpreting and testing new suggestions. Envisaging the ethical implications of the hypotheses should be considered both by authors and journal editors during the writing and publishing process.

Entwicklung von Normwerten zur Evaluation individueller psychologischer Forschungsleistungen in Abhängigkeit vom akademischem Alter und der Fachrichtung

Zusammenfassung. Zur Darstellung der Quantität und Qualität von Forschungsleistungen haben sich bibliometrische Indikatoren als nützlich erwiesen. Da diese aber vom akademischen Alter und der Fachrichtung abhängig sind, wird die Entwicklung von Normwerten auf der Grundlage einer repräsentativen Vergleichsstichprobe empfohlen. Zur Berechnung einer Normtabelle für das Fach Psychologie wurden für 877 habilitierte und im Jahr 2013 im deutschsprachigen Raum an staatlich anerkannten Universitäten tätige Psychologinnen und Psychologen der h-Index und die Publikationsanzahl in der Datenbank Scopus erhoben. Neben Unterschieden hinsichtlich des Geschlechts, des Staates, der akademischen Stellung und der Fachrichtung der Wissenschaftler fand sich ein Anstieg der mittleren Publikationsanzahl und des h-Index über die Zeit. In einer Normtabelle werden Perzentile und z-Werte zur Einordnung individueller psychologischer Forschungsleistungen in Abhängigkeit vom akademischen Alter und der Fachrichtung präsentiert. Ihre Anwendung zu Evaluationszwecken und damit verbundene Einschränkungen werden diskutiert. Eine fortlaufende Aktualisierung wird empfohlen.

Hypotheses, limits, models and life

Life is launching a new section, called Hypotheses in the Life Sciences. The new Section will complement the other sections of Life, providing a feedstock of ideas whose tests can be published in the wider Life family, and elsewhere. We will consider hypotheses that are supported by real world, rigorous evidence, by clear arguments, and which provide a potential solution to a genuine gap in our understanding of any aspect of the life sciences.

Appropriate roles for the subscriber, publisher, editor, author, and reviewer in the archives of plastic surgery

Authors, editors and reviewers, publishers, and subscribers all play their role in scientific journals. These 5 stakeholders are essential to journals. In this paper, firstly, I briefly summarize the role of each journal stakeholder and their respective goals. Secondly, the status of each participant in the Archives of Plastic Surgery is described. Finally, I propose an appropriate role and plan for each of them. Specific roles and responsibilities include the following: subscribers should welcome and submit the critiques of published papers in letters to the editor. Publishers should trust editors and provide them with adequate financial support for ongoing quality improvement of the journal. The editor-in-chief should be given a sufficient period of time-several years-to build up journal quality and train the incoming editor. The editors, including section editors, are also responsible for increasing the author pool. One editor might be designated a 'devil's referee', that is, a kind of devil's advocate with the responsibility of examining the originality of the manuscript, taking a skeptical view of the manuscript, and looking for holes in the methods and results of reported experiments. Authors' responsibilities include submitting manuscripts with scientific integrity and being ready to take responsibility for their articles even long after publication. Finally, reviewers' responsibilities include identifying similar articles not cited. Reviewers are also welcome to write a discussion on the article they review.

The Ethics of External Peer Review

External peer review can be a useful part of a quality improvement program. However, it can also be used for political and punitive purposes. The distinction between potentially useful and damaging review is largely an issue of the ethics of how it is done. The ethics of external peer review lie not only in the process itself, but also in the role of the pathologists performing the review. While there are many ethical issues involved in external peer review, the most important may be a dedication to due process, allowing the pathologist under review to respond to allegations, and an insistence on complete information prior to drawing conclusions. Well established criteria for external peer review may provide protection both for the pathologist under review against allegations of negligence or incompetence, but also for the reviewers against accusations of bad faith.