That’s not what a peer review is. Peer review is a process where a qualified researcher evaluates a single study and gives feedback on the structure, methodology, analysis, conclusions, etc. The author couldn’t even get basic terminology right in the title, which doesn’t bode well.
This is more of a literature review. But an actual literature review involves curating a selection of studies and summarizing them with citations, not just pasting them. So this is more the first step of a literature review.
This is also a bad literature review. A good literature review looks at all the recent studies on a topic, typically within the last 5-10 years, along with landmark studies on which most recent studies are based. A bad literature review cherry picks a bunch of small studies and opinion pieces going back 100 years while ignoring all the ones that are advancing knowledge.
A quick tip to identify anyone who is trying to get away with pseudoscience: if they start pulling out studies from the 1970s, they’re full of shit. It means they are definitely ignoring the last 50 years of good knowledge to construct their spurious claim out of pipe cleaners and prayers.
That’s not what a peer review is. Peer review is a process where a qualified researcher evaluates a single study and gives feedback on the structure, methodology, analysis, conclusions, etc. The author couldn’t even get basic terminology right in the title, which doesn’t bode well.
This is more of a literature review. But an actual literature review involves curating a selection of studies and summarizing them with citations, not just pasting them. So this is more the first step of a literature review.
This is also a bad literature review. A good literature review looks at all the recent studies on a topic, typically within the last 5-10 years, along with landmark studies on which most recent studies are based. A bad literature review cherry picks a bunch of small studies and opinion pieces going back 100 years while ignoring all the ones that are advancing knowledge.
A quick tip to identify anyone who is trying to get away with pseudoscience: if they start pulling out studies from the 1970s, they’re full of shit. It means they are definitely ignoring the last 50 years of good knowledge to construct their spurious claim out of pipe cleaners and prayers.