Researchers do not always trust each other and this can make it very difficult to publish in a good journal, particularly when you are starting your carrier or come from a particular region.
Do you think this is this good for science or not?
This distrust is somewhat good for science which help in an outcome of good research, but when this mistrust come in the form of insecurity among senior researchers then here, we loss the science. On the other hand, the biasnes in the peer review for a particular region and discrimination by certain groups to the new researchers set a bad example for science. Due to this certain good research don't come in the limelight.
This distrust is somewhat good for science which help in an outcome of good research, but when this mistrust come in the form of insecurity among senior researchers then here, we loss the science. On the other hand, the biasnes in the peer review for a particular region and discrimination by certain groups to the new researchers set a bad example for science. Due to this certain good research don't come in the limelight.
In recent years a number of events have shaken the measure of trust that the public holds for the application of science and the advances it offers society. Although many of these crises in confidence have arisen due to flawed implementation of policy rather than bad science, the scientific community must remain vigilant in order to preserve the trust and value that society affords scientific progress.
One of the key factors underpinning any mistrust is the public's understanding of the scientific method. Most people's perception of science is that it deals with certainties, an understandable misconception given that elementary scientific education deals with well-established theory derived from substantive research.