Todo Poder Corrompe: O Caso do Peer Review

O sistema de avaliação de trabalhos científicos conhecido como peer review, sistema em que os avaliadores julgam os trabalhos apenas pelos seus méritos científicos anonimamente, é o melhor sistema de avaliação que existe. Mas não é imune a críticas. A mais importante se refere ao abuso de poder dos editores dos journals científicos e das camarilhas que os dominam: Peer review is a system that subjects scientific and scholarly work to the scrutiny of other experts in the field. Ideally it ensures that research is only approved or published when it meets the standards of scientific rigour and its findings are sound. At its best, peer review guarantees that it is disinterested science which informs public discussion and debate. When established through peer review, the authority of science helps to clarify disputes and injects into public discussion the latest findings and research. Peer reviewing depends on a community of experts who are competent and committed to impartiality. It depends on the commitment and collaboration of scientists and scholars in a given field. However, the individuals who constitute a ‘community of experts’ also tend to be preoccupied with their own personal position and status. Often, the colleagues they are reviewing and refereeing are their competitors and sometimes even their bitter rivals. The contradiction between working as a member of an expert community and one’s own personal interests cannot always be satisfactorily resolved.