Dr. Henry Walton Jones, Jr was asked to review an article entitled, “The Golden Idol: Insights into the Inca Empire.” for the Journal of Archaeological Research. The lead author of the paper is Dr. Rene Emile Belloq, a primary rival of Dr. Jones. Please provide your thoughts on the following scenarios (no more than a few sentences per question):
- What types of conflict of interest might arise when someone is asked to review a paper or grant application?
- Dr. Jones has been away from his office on travel for the past few weeks and does not have time to review the paper. Is it ever appropriate for a peer reviewer to give a paper to a graduate student for review? If so, how should the reviewer do so?
- Dr. Jones was also pursuing research related to the Golden Idol. Is it appropriate for a peer reviewer to use ideas from an article under review to stop unfruitful research in the reviewer’s laboratory?
- What are some of the challenges in the current peer-review process, in which the peer reviewer is anonymous but the author is known to the reviewer?
Dr. Henry Walton Jones, Jr was asked to review an article entitled, “The Golden Idol: Insights into the Inca Empire.” for the Journal of Archaeological Research. The lead author of the paper is Dr. Rene Emile Belloq, a primary rival of Dr. Jones. Please provide your thoughts on the following scenarios (no more than a few sentences per question):
- What types of conflict of interest might arise when someone is asked to review a paper or grant application?
- Dr. Jones has been away from his office on travel for the past few weeks and does not have time to review the paper. Is it ever appropriate for a peer reviewer to give a paper to a graduate student for review? If so, how should the reviewer do so?
- Dr. Jones was also pursuing research related to the Golden Idol. Is it appropriate for a peer reviewer to use ideas from an article under review to stop unfruitful research in the reviewer’s laboratory?
- What are some of the challenges in the current peer-review process, in which the peer reviewer is anonymous but the author is known to the reviewer?