I can't speak to individual articles, but one thing to have your
students do is to read the mission statements (usually somewhere near
the "masthead" page) of the journals they consult. As I remember, the
journal "Creation Research" -- published by the Institute of Creation
Research -- made it clear the conclusions were known; it was only
seeking papers that would confirm those conclusions.
Another thing to do is to have them google news accounts of the
publishers of the journals in question to find out if they have a
particular slant or bias. I believe the publisher of the journal
"Energy & Environment" openly eschews peer review. As such, the journal
has become a home for papers skeptical of anthropogenic climate change.
Dave
Kerry Griffis-Kyle wrote:
I am teaching a Sophomore/Junior level evolution course at Texas Tech (where a significant proportion of my students believe evolution is anti-God). One of the activities I have them do is take three creationist claims about science and use the peer-reviewed scientific literature to find evidence to support or refute the claim. It makes them really think about the issues; and if they follow the directions, it does a better job than any of my classroom activities convincing them that the claims against evolution are just a bunch of hooey. Unfortunately, there are journals claiming peer-review status that are not. It can be very frustrating.
Like Raphael, I also wonder if there is a good source the students can use as a rubric for telling if a journal article is peer-reviewed.
*****************************
Kerry Griffis-Kyle
Assistant Professor
Department of Natural Resources Management
Texas Tech University
--- On Tue, 7/7/09, Raphael Mazor <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Raphael Mazor <[email protected]>
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] "real" versus "fake" peer-reviewed journals
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 5:03 PM
I've noticed a number of cases lately where groups with a strong political agenda (on
topics like climate change, evolution, stem cells, or human health) cite "peer
reviewed" studies in journals that are essentially fabricated for the purpose of
advancing a specific viewpoint.
What's a good way to tell when a journal is baloney? Of course, it's easy for a scientist
in his or her own field to know when a journal is a sham, but how can we let others know
it's obviously fake? For example, are only "real" journals included on major
abstract indexing services?
-- <><><><><><><><><>
Raphael D. Mazor
Biologist
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
3535 Harbor Boulevard, Suite 110
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Tel: 714-755-3235
Fax: 714-755-3299
Email: [email protected]
--
------------------------------------------------------
David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786
7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787
Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: [email protected]
USA | http: http://fuzzo.com
------------------------------------------------------
"We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo
"No trespassing
4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan
