The peer review and the training of the researcher: evaluation of scientific knowledge in the perspective of an intellectual ontogenesis

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/biblios.2019.412

Keywords:

Brazil, Intellectual ontogenesis, Peer review, Research, Training

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to identify how researchers perceive the contribution of the peer review process to their own training. Respondents are researchers from all fields of knowledge, with grants from the Brazilian funding agency Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvemeto Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). The four aspects ingestigated were: a) use of the evaluator comments to improve the manuscript; b) the importance of the arguments presented by the evaluator to justufy his position; c) use of the evaluator comments to improve the manuscript in case of refusal; d) the overall contributions of the peer review process to the researcher's training. Results show that the peer review process is perceived not only as a mechanism to improve science but also to the ongoing improvement of authors, reviewers and editors. It concludes emphazising the need to perceive peer review as an intellectual ontogenetic mechanism, capable of allowing researchers from different areas and trajectories to rethink their research objects and their analysis procedures, with a view to continuous improvement.

Author Biographies

Claudio Nei Nascimento da Silva, Instituto Federal de Brasília (IFB)

Graduado em Pedagogia pela Fundação Universidade do Tocantins (2001), Mestre em Educação pela Universidade Católica de Brasília, UCB (2004), Doutor em Ciência da Informação pela Universidade de Brasília, UnB (2016) com estágio doutoral na Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Professor do Instituto Federal de Brasília (IFB), Brasil. 

Suzana Pinheiro Machado Mueller, Universidade de Brasília (UnB), Brasil.

Graduada em Biblioteconomia e Documentação pela Universidade Federal do Paraná (1962), Master in Library Science pela George Peabody College For Teachers (Nashville, Tenn, EUA, 1975), doutora (PhD) em Information Studies pela University of Sheffield (Inglaterra, GB, 1982) e fez estágio de pós-doutorado na University of Illinois (Ill. EUA, 1993). Professora Emérita, Universidade de Brasília (UnB), Brasil. 

References

ALMEIDA, A. N. de. A motivação dos profissionais técnicos em radiologia do hospital de Clínicas da UFPR. [s.l: s.n.]. Disponível em: <http://dspace.c3sl.ufpr.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/1884/33601/ALMEIDA, ALEXANDRE NIGRIN DE.pdf?sequence=1>. Acesso em: 12 jul. 2014.

BOURDIEU, P. O campo científico (Le champ scientifique). Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, v. 2, n. 3, p. 84–104, 1976. Disponível em: <http://uaiinformatica.net/luciana/campo_cientifico_bourdieu.pdf>. Acesso em: 15 mar. 2013.

BRASIL. Resolução 16/2006. Brasília. CNPq - Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, , 2006. . Disponível em: <http://www.cnpq.br/web/guest/view/-/journal_content/56_INSTANCE_0oED/10157/100343>. Acesso em: 17 ago. 2013.

MATURANA, H.; VARELA, F. A árvore do conhecimento. São Paulo: Workshopsy, 1995.

MEADOWS, A. J. A comunicação científica. Brasília: Briquet de Lemos, 1999.

OLIVEIRA, L. H. de. Exemplo de cálculo de ranking médio para likertVarginha/MGMestrado em Adm. e Desenvolvimento Organizacional, , 2005. . Disponível em: . Acesso em: 17 set. 2014.

OMOTE, S. Revisão por pares na Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, v. 11, n. 3, p. 323–334, 2005. Disponível em: <http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-65382005000300002&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=pt>. Acesso em: 18 nov. 2013.

SANTOS, G. E. de O. Cálculo amostral. Disponível em: <http://www.calculoamostral.vai.la>. Acesso em: 1 jan. 2014.

TAYLOR & FRANCIS GROUP. Peer review in 2015: a global view. London, 2015. .

Downloads

Published

2020-12-16

How to Cite

Silva, C. N. N. da, & Mueller, S. P. M. (2020). The peer review and the training of the researcher: evaluation of scientific knowledge in the perspective of an intellectual ontogenesis. Biblios Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, (76), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.5195/biblios.2019.412

Issue

No. 76 (2019)

Section

Case report

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.