Peer reviewers are too hard

doi:10.1136/bmj.324.7348.0/f

Peer reviewers are too hard

Peer reviewers often make unfounded statistical criticisms that waste time and sap the morale of researchers, says Bacchetti(p 1271). Why they do this, he says, comes from a pervasive desireto find something to criticise $---$ a concept overvalued in Westernsociety. Additionally, there is the notion that finding flawsis the key to high quality peer review. Changing the culture ofpeer review, particularly by allowing fellow reviewers to ratereviews and editors to comment on their helpfulness or authorson their constructiveness, could lead to less pressure to criticiseand less statisticaldogmatism.