as I said before, if the journal is authentic and if I am not intending to repeat the
experiment, I dont read the article in its entirety. There are quite a few journals
out there publishing junk science, pseudoscience, etc.

The referees in authentic journals are the people most competent to determine if
proper scientific methodology has been followed. They are putting their seal of
approval that the procedures, the statistical analysis, even the quality of the lab
itself is up to the standards for publication in that journal. and that includes
that the abstract accurately reflects what the researchers found. Scientists in the
main are only competent in a very small area of research, that is competent to make
judgements about another labs work. In real science labs this review starts within
the lab itself among colleagues, within the department. It is only when it has been
vetted internally (including opening the raw data lab books for viewing) that it is
passed onto external review by submission. We must all rely on the competence of the
scientists involved, and the journal to select appropriate referees for each
submitted article. For that reason I assess the value of the journal first.
without that, the whole article is untrustworthy. after that, I look carefully at
who is doing the funding for the research. it speaks volumes about the possible bias
of the researchers. Ingrid


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.