Is it no longer required that you provide a peer-reviewed reference in

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pythagorean
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The requirement for providing peer-reviewed references in skepticism and debunking posts is under review by staff. Currently, posts that are anecdotal or from mainstream sources may not need such references, while claims or discussions on non-mainstream science still require them. There has been an increase in threads that do not adhere to the established rules for skepticism and debunking, which is intended for claims and evidence of unexplained phenomena. The forum aims to prevent misuse of this section for theory development. An update will be provided once the discussion concludes.
Pythagorean
Science Advisor
Messages
4,416
Reaction score
327
Is it no longer required that you provide a peer-reviewed reference in the OP in skepticism and debunking?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Staff is currently discussing this, thanks for your concern. We'll post an update as soon as we can.
 


Pythagorean said:
Is it no longer required that you provide a peer-reviewed reference in the OP in skepticism and debunking?
It depends on the post, if it's just an anecdote about an experience and makes no claims, or an article about something unusual from a "mainstream" source, it's ok. If it is a "claim", or deals with non-mainstream science, forum rules requiring peer-reviewed research in a journal listed with Thompson-Reuters, etc... apply.

There has been a spate of threads started that do not fit the requirements of S&D, which is for "Claims of and evidence for unexplained phenomena", it is not to be used to side step the science forums' rules and become another "Theory development" forum. We are discussing it.

EDIT: Oops, Greg snuck in while I was writing.
 

Thread 'Thank you to mentors, advisors and members'

I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
View full post »

Thread 'Thank you physics forums, 20 years later'

About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...
View full post »

Similar threads

Submit Articles for Insights: Procedure, Length, Graphics, Peer-Review
Replies
3
Views
3K
How can I get peer-reviewed studies supporting my assertions?
Replies
15
Views
1K
I How Can I Get Published Without an Endorsement?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Discussion of PF Policy on Valid References
2
Replies
71
Views
6K
Bug Permission Denied: My Encounter with a Terrifying Website
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Fiction Writer with question for research physicists - Looking for opinions and experiences with peer-reviewed publishing
Replies
3
Views
2K
Breaking Into the Field: Re-evaluating Advice Given
Replies
5
Views
1K
Monument to peer review unveiled in Moscow
Replies
6
Views
2K
Double blind peer review winners and losers
Replies
34
Views
4K
Online database with peer reviewed journals
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top