Bias in peer review

Peer review means the process of checking the work done by referee to ensure that the work ‎meets certain criteria. This study, with a brief description of the performance, history, scope of peer ‎review, seeks to clarify the complex social interactions of individuals directly and indirectly involved in ‎peer review by introducing a variety of bias studies.‎Methodology‏:‏‎ The method of this research is descriptive-analytical and its content is collected through ‎review of resources.‎

Despite its importance to the scientific community, it is often criticized for its shortcomings. ‎Bias is one of the shortcomings that is known about peer review. Issues such as author nationality, ‎nationality of reviewers, publishing, interdisciplinary research, gender, organizational affiliation, author-‎referee dependency, etc. are effective in evaluating peer reviewers, which has produced different types ‎of bias in peer review. Experimental findings do not provide an accurate picture of this‏ ‏subject.‎

In the ideal world, reconciliation must be independent of the social identity of the writers ‎and referees and the theoretical cognitive bias of the referees; and the writings must be based on ‎originality, innovation, and impact. Because of the subjective nature of the existing peer review system, it ‎cannot be expected that the peer review system has a high level of objectivity and will act without bias ‎and divergence of tastes related to the cultural identities, social interests and professional and intellectual ‎expectations of the judges. Although it is not entirely possible to eliminate bias in arbitration, ‎understanding the types of bias involved in this practice may help to reduce bias by the referee and ‎increase the accuracy of the match. Scientific review and empirical research in evaluating the peer ‎review, providing ethical standards for authors, referees and editors, and peer reviewers training can be ‎ways to improve the peer review system. ‎