Case Study: Should you listen to a peer reviewer?

TitleCase Study: Should you listen to a peer reviewer?
Publication TypeCase Study
Year of Publication2013
AuthorsDuBois, JM
Corporate AuthorsUnited States, Department of Heath and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity,
Date Published09/2013
PublisherUnited States, Department of Heath and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity
KeywordsMEDICINE , Peer , Peer review
AbstractGail is an Associate Professor who has published extensively and rightly considers herself to be one of the leading experts in her field. She has recently submitted a grant proposal and has now received back the funder's reviews. Though she has received a good score, it is below the cut-off point at which it can be funded, so she plans to see what concerns the peer reviewers had, and resubmit the revised proposal during the next funding cycle. However, when Gail reads the reviewer's comments, she is shocked. In their feedback, they say that her methods are "flawed" and suggest changes to the study design that Gail is certain would significantly compromise the quality of the science and the impact of the study on her field. They clearly did not understand her approach which is highly novel. Gail decides she can take to approaches to resubmitting the proposal. First, she could submit the proposal employing the review's suggested methodology, and then actual do the study as she proposed in the first place, explaining that "pilot testing" indicated that her methodology would be best. Or, she could propose her original "flawed" methodology with a direct response to reviewers in hopes that she will receive new reviewers or that the reviewers will be unusually open-minded. What should she do?
URLhttp://ori.hhs.gov/blog/case-study-should-you-listen-peer-reviewer
Full Text

Discipline: 

Subject: 

Publication: