Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
"Which statement describes a problem with the peer review process in scientific research? It can sometimes reject important new ideas or novel techniques. It forces new scientists to meet the same standards that established scientists meet. It always requires scientists to have to reanalyze their data. It often makes it more difficult to justify a conclusion."
Answer:
It can sometimes reject important new ideas or novel techniques.
Explanation:
In academic circles, Peer Review, also called peer review or arbitration, is a process used to publish articles and to grant resources for research. It consists of submitting the scientific work to the scrutiny of one or more specialists of the same rank as the author, who most of the time remain anonymous. These anonymous reviewers often make comments or suggest editing the analyzed work, contributing to its quality. In the case of publication of scientific articles, the dialogue between authors and reviewers is arbitrated by one or more editors, affiliated with the scientific journal in question. Those publications and awards that have not gone through peer review tend to be viewed with suspicion by academics and professionals in various fields.
However, sometimes this review does not welcome ideas, important ideas and innovative techniques that modify traditional thoughts and end up asking the authors to remove these innovations from their work.
