3

In a research paper scientific experiments are carried out and their results recorded. Anybody can just fabricate experiment data saying they did an experiment and these were the results. The only way you'd know if it was true is if other non related people repeated the experiments and found the same data.

Does the peer review process ensure experimental data being reported is accurate and how so?

3
0

Does the peer review process ensure experimental data being reported is accurate and how so?

At very least, the peer review process is not designed to catch intentional fabrication because reviewers are only asked to read the manuscripts.

That being said, intentional fabrications sometimes get caught during the review process if reviewer go above and beyond the call of duty.

The real check on fabrication is replication, which usually happen after publication.

1
  • And, often, a reviewer in the field may well be doing similar experiments and know what the data mostly should look like. Data that looks too clean, or doesn't have appropriate features, or other typical experimental issues are going to need explaining.
    – Jon Custer
    Jun 18 '20 at 23:01
0

No. Peer review ensures the analysis of the experiment and associated data is correct.

Thankfully oftentimes the reviewers will have some experience and may question how this or that manipulation was done, may challenge the justification for a hypothesis or an assumption, or may ask why this new data is so much like or unlike previous data, but it is very unlikely that a referee will have the resources in time and/or funding to redo an experiment and verify the accuracy of the data submitted..

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.