review of published research work mcq

Research guidance, Research Journals, Top Universities

Understanding Research & Publication Ethics through MCQ

Research and Publication Ethics : In this blog post (MCQ on Research & Publication Ethics), you will understand Research ethics through various MCQs.

Topics Covered : Literature Review, Review Paper Writing, Writing a Research article, etc;

MCQs on Research & Publication Ethics

1. In the Literature review, systematic reorganization and reshuffling of the information to develop knowledge/ reasoning/ problem definition is referred to as-

 Synthesizing

 Summarizing

 Both 1 and 2

 None of these

2. Rationale of the study is

 Logic leading to methodology

 Logic leading to aim and objectives

 Logic behind Introduction

 All the above

3. Literature review for which body of knowledge is collected from the supervisor is –

 Literature Survey

 Experience survey

 Objective survey

 Both 2 and 1

4. A literature review is ………… of research.

  Foundation

 Last step

 a formality

 Both 2 and 3

5. Doing literature review from broader topic to a focal point is the-

 Literature search

 Convergent search

 Objective search

 Both b and c

6. Objectives of a study must be –

 Specific & Measurable

 Relevant & Time-bound

 1 & 2 both

 Easy to do

7. Literature review/survey is a –

 Continuous process

 Initial stage process

 Offline process

 All of the above

8. Curly bracket {} will search for the –

 Specific phrases

 Fussy phrases

 Both a and b

9. Systematic and organized compilation and critical study of a related body of knowledge is called

 Literature review

 Data analysis

 Statistical analysis

 Result & Discussion

10. Boolean search does not include-

11. SHODHGANGOTRI is the databases of-

 Thesis

  Synopsis

12. PUBMED is maintained in the US by the

  NCBI

13. SHODHGANGA is the database of –

  Thesis

 Synopsis

14. INFLIBNET is –

 Informatics and Library Network Centre

 Library and Information Network Centre

 Information and Library Network Centre

15. Which does not cover the social sciences database

 Scopus

  Pubmed

 Web of Science

16. The free national repository of Indian synopsis database is/are

 Shodhshudhi

 Shodhganga

 Eshodhsindhu

 None of the above

17. Literature management tool/(s)-

 Mendeley

 Endnote

 b & c both

18. DOAR stands for –

 Directory of open access repository

 Dictionary of open access repository

 Development of analytical report

 Development of access report

19. Which is a huge subscription-based scientific citation indexing service

 Shodganga

 Shodgangotri

20. Endnote supports importing in

 BiBtex

 EndNote

 a & b both

Research & Publication Ethics MCQs on Review Paper

21. Outline of the review paper

 drawn in the planning stage in consultation with mentor and research team

 should be tight and focussed

 unique summarising and synthesizing of idea

22. The review paper is different from the literature review in

 size, shape, and approach

 size only

 shape only

 size and shape

23. Systematic reviews are common in

 social sciences

 sciences

 life sciences

 sciences and life sciences

24. The section of the article which must not have subheadings

 methods

 introduction

 discussion

25. Writing review paper should be started

 in the early stage of planning your research topic

 in the later stage of planning of your research topic

 in the final stage of execution of your research work

 a & c both

26. The first rule of writing a body of the paper is

 include many references

 stick to your outline

 use effective English

27. In the conclusion section

 no separate headings are used

 the objective of the paper is restated

 the expected outcome may be included

28. Review papers are written for

 giving a new direction to existing research

 increasing the h index of author/researcher

 wide readership

29. Abstract is

 same as your Ph.D. research synopsis

 a comprehensive research summary with good length

 crisp, short, and representative summary of research work

30. Review paper writing is associated with a paradox

 Intensive task but not much recognition as compared to research papers

 Less effort is needed but more recognition as compared to research papers

 No lab work but more readership as compared to research papers

31. Which one of the following should not be acknowledged in an article

 Project grant

 Analytical facility provider

 Gift sample providers

 Senior authors

32. Identify which one of the following is a correct pair

 Acknowledgment – sources of study

 Materials and methods – output of the experiments

 The abstract – central idea

 Discussion – rationality of the work

33. Which is not a good a practice

 to cut the work into smaller pieces of work

 Plan the preliminary promising studies which yielded good and novel results

 Select journals with good indexing or Impact factor

34. IMRaD stands for

 introduction, material /methods, results and discussion

 investigation, methods results and discussion

 investigation, methods, results, analysis discussion

35. Title of the paper should be?

 Simple

 Reader-friendly

 Representative of study

36. Two key features of the Method section are

 short and catchy sentences

 clarity and the reproducibility

 accuracy and precision

37. In the introduction, you should

 give a brief background and brief literature review

 introduce the topic

 identify research gap, define problem & present rationality

38. In the result section

 Do not exaggerate the results

 Do not be afraid of reporting negative results

 Statistical support must be there

39. Infographics

 must be self-explanatory

 must have suitable legends or footnotes

40. The materials and methods section is also known as

 Methods

 Experimental

 Methodology

41. Major factors to be considered in right referencing are

 Quality

 Quantity

 Uniform Styles/ guidelines

 All of these

42. Sources of information that you are giving at the end of your manuscript is termed as

  Reference

 Results

 Discussions

43. When references are listed in alphabetical order stating the last name of the first author like Smith, G. (2008) is –

 APA style

 MLA style

 CMS style

44. Graphical abstract may contain –

 A graph

 A figure

 An image

45. Suggested reviewers should not include-

 Your supervisor

 Field experts

 Both A and B

46. Keywords of a manuscript can be related to the –

 Title

 Content

47. When “neither author nor peer reviewers know about the names of each other” This technique are called as –

 Double-blind

 Single Blind

48. The proofreading step is the final step –

 After acceptance

 Before acceptance

49. One should Discuss the results-

 Critically

 With Logical reasoning

 With general statements

50. The author should address the reviewer’s comments –

 Humbly

 Logically

Thanks for visiting our website to understand the Research & Publication Ethics through MCQs.

Share this:

2 thoughts on “understanding research & publication ethics through mcq”.

very much helpful and handy notes through mcq

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Research Methodology

• Introduction to Research Methodology
• Research Approaches
• Concepts of Theory and Empiricism
• Characteristics of scientific method
• Understanding the Language of Research
• 11 Steps in Research Process
• Research Design
• Different Research Designs
• Compare and Contrast the Main Types of Research Designs
• Cross-sectional research design
• Qualitative and Quantitative Research
• Descriptive Research VS Qualitative Research
• Experimental Research VS Quantitative Research
• Sampling Design
• Probability VS Non-Probability Sampling

40 MCQ on Research Methodology

• MCQ on research Process
• MCQ on Research Design
• 18 MCQ on Quantitative Research
• 30 MCQ on Qualitative Research
• 45 MCQ on Sampling Methods
• 20 MCQ on Principles And Planning For Research

Q1. Which of the following statement is correct? (A) Reliability ensures the validity (B) Validity ensures reliability (C) Reliability and validity are independent of each other (D) Reliability does not depend on objectivity

Answer:  (C)

Q2. Which of the following statements is correct? (A) Objectives of research are stated in first chapter of the thesis (B) Researcher must possess analytical ability (C) Variability is the source of problem (D) All the above

Answer:  (D)

Q3. The first step of research is: (A) Selecting a problem (B) Searching a problem (C) Finding a problem (D) Identifying a problem

Q4. Research can be conducted by a person who: (A) holds a postgraduate degree (B) has studied research methodology (C) possesses thinking and reasoning ability (D) is a hard worker

Answer: (B)

Q5. Research can be classified as: (A) Basic, Applied and Action Research (B) Philosophical, Historical, Survey and Experimental Research (C) Quantitative and Qualitative Research (D) All the above

Q6. To test null hypothesis, a researcher uses: (A) t test (B) ANOVA (C)  X 2 (D) factorial analysis

Answer:  (B)

Q7. Bibliography given in a research report: (A) shows vast knowledge of the researcher (B) helps those interested in further research (C) has no relevance to research (D) all the above

Q8. A research problem is feasible only when: (A) it has utility and relevance (B) it is researchable (C) it is new and adds something to knowledge (D) all the above

Q9. The study in which the investigators attempt to trace an effect is known as: (A) Survey Research (B) Summative Research (C) Historical Research (D) ‘Ex-post Facto’ Research

Answer: (D)

Q10. Generalized conclusion on the basis of a sample is technically known as: (A) Data analysis and interpretation (B) Parameter inference (C) Statistical inference (D) All of the above

Answer:  (A)

Q11. Fundamental research reflects the ability to: (A) Synthesize new ideals (B) Expound new principles (C) Evaluate the existing material concerning research (D) Study the existing literature regarding various topics

Q12. The main characteristic of scientific research is: (A) empirical (B) theoretical (C) experimental (D) all of the above

Q13. Authenticity of a research finding is its: (A) Originality (B) Validity (C) Objectivity (D) All of the above

Q14. Which technique is generally followed when the population is finite? (A) Area Sampling Technique (B) Purposive Sampling Technique (C) Systematic Sampling Technique (D) None of the above

Q15. Research problem is selected from the stand point of: (A) Researcher’s interest (B) Financial support (C) Social relevance (D) Availability of relevant literature

Q16. The research is always – (A) verifying the old knowledge (B) exploring new knowledge (C) filling the gap between knowledge (D) all of these

Q17. Research is (A) Searching again and again (B) Finding a solution to any problem (C) Working in a scientific way to search for the truth of any problem (D) None of the above

Q20. A common test in research demands much priority on (A) Reliability (B) Useability (C) Objectivity (D) All of the above

Q21. Which of the following is the first step in starting the research process? (A) Searching sources of information to locate the problem. (B) Survey of related literature (C) Identification of the problem (D) Searching for solutions to the problem

Answer: (C)

Q22. Which correlation coefficient best explains the relationship between creativity and intelligence? (A) 1.00 (B) 0.6 (C) 0.5 (D) 0.3

Q23. Manipulation is always a part of (A) Historical research (B) Fundamental research (C) Descriptive research (D) Experimental research

Explanation: In experimental research, researchers deliberately manipulate one or more independent variables to observe their effects on dependent variables. The goal is to establish cause-and-effect relationships and test hypotheses. This type of research often involves control groups and random assignment to ensure the validity of the findings. Manipulation is an essential aspect of experimental research to assess the impact of specific variables and draw conclusions about their influence on the outcome.

Q24. The research which is exploring new facts through the study of the past is called (A) Philosophical research (B) Historical research (C) Mythological research (D) Content analysis

Q25. A null hypothesis is (A) when there is no difference between the variables (B) the same as research hypothesis (C) subjective in nature (D) when there is difference between the variables

Q26. We use Factorial Analysis: (A) To know the relationship between two variables (B) To test the Hypothesis (C) To know the difference between two variables (D) To know the difference among the many variables

Explanation: Factorial analysis, specifically factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA), is used to investigate the effects of two or more independent variables on a dependent variable. It helps to determine whether there are significant differences or interactions among the independent variables and their combined effects on the dependent variable.

Q27. Which of the following is classified in the category of the developmental research? (A) Philosophical research (B) Action research (C) Descriptive research (D) All the above

Q28.  Action-research is: (A) An applied research (B) A research carried out to solve immediate problems (C) A longitudinal research (D) All the above

Explanation: Action research is an approach to research that encompasses all the options mentioned. It is an applied research method where researchers work collaboratively with practitioners or stakeholders to address immediate problems or issues in a real-world context. It is often conducted over a period of time, making it a longitudinal research approach. So, all the options (A) An applied research, (B) A research carried out to solve immediate problems, and (C) A longitudinal research are correct when describing action research.

Q29.  The basis on which assumptions are formulated: (A) Cultural background of the country (B) Universities (C) Specific characteristics of the castes (D) All of these

Q30. How can the objectivity of the research be enhanced? (A) Through its impartiality (B) Through its reliability (C) Through its validity (D) All of these

Q31.  A research problem is not feasible only when: (A) it is researchable (B) it is new and adds something to the knowledge (C) it consists of independent and dependent var i ables (D) it has utility and relevance

Explanation:  A research problem is considered feasible when it can be studied and investigated using appropriate research methods and resources. The presence of independent and dependent variables is not a factor that determines the feasibility of a research problem. Instead, it is an essential component of a well-defined research problem that helps in formulating research questions or hypotheses. Feasibility depends on whether the research problem can be addressed and answered within the constraints of available time, resources, and methods. Options (A), (B), and (D) are more relevant to the feasibility of a research problem.

Q32. The process not needed in experimental research is: (A) Observation (B) Manipulation and replication (C) Controlling (D) Reference collection

In experimental research, reference collection is not a part of the process.

Q33. When a research problem is related to heterogeneous population, the most suitable sampling method is: (A) Cluster Sampling (B) Stratified Sampling (C) Convenient Sampling (D) Lottery Method

Explanation: When a research problem involves a heterogeneous population, stratified sampling is the most suitable sampling method. Stratified sampling involves dividing the population into subgroups or strata based on certain characteristics or variables. Each stratum represents a relatively homogeneous subset of the population. Then, a random sample is taken from each stratum in proportion to its size or importance in the population. This method ensures that the sample is representative of the diversity present in the population and allows for more precise estimates of population parameters for each subgroup.

Q34.  Generalised conclusion on the basis of a sample is technically known as: (A) Data analysis and interpretation (B) Parameter inference (C) Statistical inference (D) All of the above

Explanation: Generalized conclusions based on a sample are achieved through statistical inference. It involves using sample data to make inferences or predictions about a larger population. Statistical inference helps researchers draw conclusions, estimate parameters, and test hypotheses about the population from which the sample was taken. It is a fundamental concept in statistics and plays a crucial role in various fields, including research, data analysis, and decision-making.

Q35. The experimental study is based on

(A) The manipulation of variables (B) Conceptual parameters (C) Replication of research (D) Survey of literature

Q36.  Which one is called non-probability sampling? (A) Cluster sampling (B) Quota sampling (C) Systematic sampling (D) Stratified random sampling

Q37.  Formulation of hypothesis may NOT be required in: (A) Survey method (B) Historical studies (C) Experimental studies (D) Normative studies

Q38. Field-work-based research is classified as: (A) Empirical (B) Historical (C) Experimental (D) Biographical

Q39. Which of the following sampling method is appropriate to study the prevalence of AIDS amongst male and female in India in 1976, 1986, 1996 and 2006? (A) Cluster sampling (B) Systematic sampling (C) Quota sampling (D) Stratified random sampling

Q40. The research that applies the laws at the time of field study to draw more and more clear ideas about the problem is: (A) Applied research (B) Action research (C) Experimental research (D) None of these

Answer: (A)

Literature Review

A literature review is a written summary of the findings of a literature ________ search review proposal

Rate this question:

In the powerpoint we indicate there are three key aspects to a literature review : summarising, synthesising and ______________ referencing citing paraphrasing evaluating

Your literature review is a list of all the work published on your topic and who argues what. true or false , there are different ways to organise your literature review. tick all which apply.

Chronologically

Thematically

Methodologically

Anyway that makes sense to me; it's my work!

A visual ______ map might help you plan the structure of the literature review

When you are referencing correctly you will probably have an in-_____ citation and a bibliography/reference list. (although this might depend on which referencing style you are using).

Quiz Review Timeline +

Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.

• Current Version
• Mar 22, 2023 Quiz Edited by ProProfs Editorial Team
• Feb 24, 2015 Quiz Created by Ncllibsoc

Related Topics

• Short Story

Recent Quizzes

Featured Quizzes

Popular Topics

• Animation Quizzes
• Art History Quizzes
• Art Terms Quizzes
• Artist Quizzes
• Craft Quizzes
• Culinary Art Quizzes
• Dance Quizzes
• Drawing Quizzes
• Fine Art Quizzes
• Magic Quizzes
• Painting Quizzes
• Photography Quizzes

Related Quizzes

Wait! Here's an interesting quiz for you.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Reumatologia
• v.59(1); 2021

Peer review guidance: a primer for researchers

Olena zimba.

1 Department of Internal Medicine No. 2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine

Armen Yuri Gasparyan

2 Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UK

The peer review process is essential for quality checks and validation of journal submissions. Although it has some limitations, including manipulations and biased and unfair evaluations, there is no other alternative to the system. Several peer review models are now practised, with public review being the most appropriate in view of the open science movement. Constructive reviewer comments are increasingly recognised as scholarly contributions which should meet certain ethics and reporting standards. The Publons platform, which is now part of the Web of Science Group (Clarivate Analytics), credits validated reviewer accomplishments and serves as an instrument for selecting and promoting the best reviewers. All authors with relevant profiles may act as reviewers. Adherence to research reporting standards and access to bibliographic databases are recommended to help reviewers draft evidence-based and detailed comments.

Introduction

The peer review process is essential for evaluating the quality of scholarly works, suggesting corrections, and learning from other authors’ mistakes. The principles of peer review are largely based on professionalism, eloquence, and collegiate attitude. As such, reviewing journal submissions is a privilege and responsibility for ‘elite’ research fellows who contribute to their professional societies and add value by voluntarily sharing their knowledge and experience.

Since the launch of the first academic periodicals back in 1665, the peer review has been mandatory for validating scientific facts, selecting influential works, and minimizing chances of publishing erroneous research reports [ 1 ]. Over the past centuries, peer review models have evolved from single-handed editorial evaluations to collegial discussions, with numerous strengths and inevitable limitations of each practised model [ 2 , 3 ]. With multiplication of periodicals and editorial management platforms, the reviewer pool has expanded and internationalized. Various sets of rules have been proposed to select skilled reviewers and employ globally acceptable tools and language styles [ 4 , 5 ].

In the era of digitization, the ethical dimension of the peer review has emerged, necessitating involvement of peers with full understanding of research and publication ethics to exclude unethical articles from the pool of evidence-based research and reviews [ 6 ]. In the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, some, if not most, journals face the unavailability of skilled reviewers, resulting in an unprecedented increase of articles without a history of peer review or those with surprisingly short evaluation timelines [ 7 ].

Editorial recommendations and the best reviewers

Guidance on peer review and selection of reviewers is currently available in the recommendations of global editorial associations which can be consulted by journal editors for updating their ethics statements and by research managers for crediting the evaluators. The International Committee on Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) qualifies peer review as a continuation of the scientific process that should involve experts who are able to timely respond to reviewer invitations, submitting unbiased and constructive comments, and keeping confidentiality [ 8 ].

The reviewer roles and responsibilities are listed in the updated recommendations of the Council of Science Editors (CSE) [ 9 ] where ethical conduct is viewed as a premise of the quality evaluations. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) further emphasizes editorial strategies that ensure transparent and unbiased reviewer evaluations by trained professionals [ 10 ]. Finally, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) prioritizes selecting the best reviewers with validated profiles to avoid substandard or fraudulent reviewer comments [ 11 ]. Accordingly, the Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications encourages reviewers to register with the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) platform to validate and publicize their scholarly activities [ 12 ].

Although the best reviewer criteria are not listed in the editorial recommendations, it is apparent that the manuscript evaluators should be active researchers with extensive experience in the subject matter and an impressive list of relevant and recent publications [ 13 ]. All authors embarking on an academic career and publishing articles with active contact details can be involved in the evaluation of others’ scholarly works [ 14 ]. Ideally, the reviewers should be peers of the manuscript authors with equal scholarly ranks and credentials.

However, journal editors may employ schemes that engage junior research fellows as co-reviewers along with their mentors and senior fellows [ 15 ]. Such a scheme is successfully practised within the framework of the Emerging EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) Network (EMEUNET) where seasoned authors (mentors) train ongoing researchers (mentees) how to evaluate submissions to the top rheumatology journals and select the best evaluators for regular contributors to these journals [ 16 ].

The awareness of the EQUATOR Network reporting standards may help the reviewers to evaluate methodology and suggest related revisions. Statistical skills help the reviewers to detect basic mistakes and suggest additional analyses. For example, scanning data presentation and revealing mistakes in the presentation of means and standard deviations often prompt re-analyses of distributions and replacement of parametric tests with non-parametric ones [ 17 , 18 ].

Constructive reviewer comments

The main goal of the peer review is to support authors in their attempt to publish ethically sound and professionally validated works that may attract readers’ attention and positively influence healthcare research and practice. As such, an optimal reviewer comment has to comprehensively examine all parts of the research and review work ( Table I ). The best reviewers are viewed as contributors who guide authors on how to correct mistakes, discuss study limitations, and highlight its strengths [ 19 ].

Structure of a reviewer comment to be forwarded to authors

Some of the currently practised review models are well positioned to help authors reveal and correct their mistakes at pre- or post-publication stages ( Table II ). The global move toward open science is particularly instrumental for increasing the quality and transparency of reviewer contributions.

Advantages and disadvantages of common manuscript evaluation models

Since there are no universally acceptable criteria for selecting reviewers and structuring their comments, instructions of all peer-reviewed journal should specify priorities, models, and expected review outcomes [ 20 ]. Monitoring and reporting average peer review timelines is also required to encourage timely evaluations and avoid delays. Depending on journal policies and article types, the first round of peer review may last from a few days to a few weeks. The fast-track review (up to 3 days) is practised by some top journals which process clinical trial reports and other priority items.

In exceptional cases, reviewer contributions may result in substantive changes, appreciated by authors in the official acknowledgments. In most cases, however, reviewers should avoid engaging in the authors’ research and writing. They should refrain from instructing the authors on additional tests and data collection as these may delay publication of original submissions with conclusive results.

Established publishers often employ advanced editorial management systems that support reviewers by providing instantaneous access to the review instructions, online structured forms, and some bibliographic databases. Such support enables drafting of evidence-based comments that examine the novelty, ethical soundness, and implications of the reviewed manuscripts [ 21 ].

Encouraging reviewers to submit their recommendations on manuscript acceptance/rejection and related editorial tasks is now a common practice. Skilled reviewers may prompt the editors to reject or transfer manuscripts which fall outside the journal scope, perform additional ethics checks, and minimize chances of publishing erroneous and unethical articles. They may also raise concerns over the editorial strategies in their comments to the editors.

Since reviewer and editor roles are distinct, reviewer recommendations are aimed at helping editors, but not at replacing their decision-making functions. The final decisions rest with handling editors. Handling editors weigh not only reviewer comments, but also priorities related to article types and geographic origins, space limitations in certain periods, and envisaged influence in terms of social media attention and citations. This is why rejections of even flawless manuscripts are likely at early rounds of internal and external evaluations across most peer-reviewed journals.

Reviewers are often requested to comment on language correctness and overall readability of the evaluated manuscripts. Given the wide availability of in-house and external editing services, reviewer comments on language mistakes and typos are categorized as minor. At the same time, non-Anglophone experts’ poor language skills often exclude them from contributing to the peer review in most influential journals [ 22 ]. Comments should be properly edited to convey messages in positive or neutral tones, express ideas of varying degrees of certainty, and present logical order of words, sentences, and paragraphs [ 23 , 24 ]. Consulting linguists on communication culture, passing advanced language courses, and honing commenting skills may increase the overall quality and appeal of the reviewer accomplishments [ 5 , 25 ].

Peer reviewer credits

Various crediting mechanisms have been proposed to motivate reviewers and maintain the integrity of science communication [ 26 ]. Annual reviewer acknowledgments are widely practised for naming manuscript evaluators and appreciating their scholarly contributions. Given the need to weigh reviewer contributions, some journal editors distinguish ‘elite’ reviewers with numerous evaluations and award those with timely and outstanding accomplishments [ 27 ]. Such targeted recognition ensures ethical soundness of the peer review and facilitates promotion of the best candidates for grant funding and academic job appointments [ 28 ].

Also, large publishers and learned societies issue certificates of excellence in reviewing which may include Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points [ 29 ]. Finally, an entirely new crediting mechanism is proposed to award bonus points to active reviewers who may collect, transfer, and use these points to discount gold open-access charges within the publisher consortia [ 30 ].

With the launch of Publons ( http://publons.com/ ) and its integration with Web of Science Group (Clarivate Analytics), reviewer recognition has become a matter of scientific prestige. Reviewers can now freely open their Publons accounts and record their contributions to online journals with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). Journal editors, in turn, may generate official reviewer acknowledgments and encourage reviewers to forward them to Publons for building up individual reviewer and journal profiles. All published articles maintain e-links to their review records and post-publication promotion on social media, allowing the reviewers to continuously track expert evaluations and comments. A paid-up partnership is also available to journals and publishers for automatically transferring peer-review records to Publons upon mutually acceptable arrangements.

Listing reviewer accomplishments on an individual Publons profile showcases scholarly contributions of the account holder. The reviewer accomplishments placed next to the account holders’ own articles and editorial accomplishments point to the diversity of scholarly contributions. Researchers may establish links between their Publons and ORCID accounts to further benefit from complementary services of both platforms. Publons Academy ( https://publons.com/community/academy/ ) additionally offers an online training course to novice researchers who may improve their reviewing skills under the guidance of experienced mentors and journal editors. Finally, journal editors may conduct searches through the Publons platform to select the best reviewers across academic disciplines.

Peer review ethics

Prior to accepting reviewer invitations, scholars need to weigh a number of factors which may compromise their evaluations. First of all, they are required to accept the reviewer invitations if they are capable of timely submitting their comments. Peer review timelines depend on article type and vary widely across journals. The rules of transparent publishing necessitate recording manuscript submission and acceptance dates in article footnotes to inform readers of the evaluation speed and to help investigators in the event of multiple unethical submissions. Timely reviewer accomplishments often enable fast publication of valuable works with positive implications for healthcare. Unjustifiably long peer review, on the contrary, delays dissemination of influential reports and results in ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism of a manuscript under evaluation [ 31 ].

In the times of proliferation of open-access journals relying on article processing charges, unjustifiably short review may point to the absence of quality evaluation and apparently ‘predatory’ publishing practice [ 32 , 33 ]. Authors when choosing their target journals should take into account the peer review strategy and associated timelines to avoid substandard periodicals.

Reviewer primary interests (unbiased evaluation of manuscripts) may come into conflict with secondary interests (promotion of their own scholarly works), necessitating disclosures by filling in related parts in the online reviewer window or uploading the ICMJE conflict of interest forms. Biomedical reviewers, who are directly or indirectly supported by the pharmaceutical industry, may encounter conflicts while evaluating drug research. Such instances require explicit disclosures of conflicts and/or rejections of reviewer invitations.

Journal editors are obliged to employ mechanisms for disclosing reviewer financial and non-financial conflicts of interest to avoid processing of biased comments [ 34 ]. They should also cautiously process negative comments that oppose dissenting, but still valid, scientific ideas [ 35 ]. Reviewer conflicts that stem from academic activities in a competitive environment may introduce biases, resulting in unfair rejections of manuscripts with opposing concepts, results, and interpretations. The same academic conflicts may lead to coercive reviewer self-citations, forcing authors to incorporate suggested reviewer references or face negative feedback and an unjustified rejection [ 36 ]. Notably, several publisher investigations have demonstrated a global scale of such misconduct, involving some highly cited researchers and top scientific journals [ 37 ].

Fake peer review, an extreme example of conflict of interest, is another form of misconduct that has surfaced in the time of mass proliferation of gold open-access journals and publication of articles without quality checks [ 38 ]. Fake reviews are generated by manipulating authors and commercial editing agencies with full access to their own manuscripts and peer review evaluations in the journal editorial management systems. The sole aim of these reviews is to break the manuscript evaluation process and to pave the way for publication of pseudoscientific articles. Authors of these articles are often supported by funds intended for the growth of science in non-Anglophone countries [ 39 ]. Iranian and Chinese authors are often caught submitting fake reviews, resulting in mass retractions by large publishers [ 38 ]. Several suggestions have been made to overcome this issue, with assigning independent reviewers and requesting their ORCID IDs viewed as the most practical options [ 40 ].

Conclusions

The peer review process is regulated by publishers and editors, enforcing updated global editorial recommendations. Selecting the best reviewers and providing authors with constructive comments may improve the quality of published articles. Reviewers are selected in view of their professional backgrounds and skills in research reporting, statistics, ethics, and language. Quality reviewer comments attract superior submissions and add to the journal’s scientific prestige [ 41 ].

In the era of digitization and open science, various online tools and platforms are available to upgrade the peer review and credit experts for their scholarly contributions. With its links to the ORCID platform and social media channels, Publons now offers the optimal model for crediting and keeping track of the best and most active reviewers. Publons Academy additionally offers online training for novice researchers who may benefit from the experience of their mentoring editors. Overall, reviewer training in how to evaluate journal submissions and avoid related misconduct is an important process, which some indexed journals are experimenting with [ 42 ].

The timelines and rigour of the peer review may change during the current pandemic. However, journal editors should mobilize their resources to avoid publication of unchecked and misleading reports. Additional efforts are required to monitor published contents and encourage readers to post their comments on publishers’ online platforms (blogs) and other social media channels [ 43 , 44 ].

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

30 MCQ on Research Review in Social Work

 30 mcq on research review in social work.

1. Question: What is the primary purpose of conducting a research review in social work? a. To assess the quality and findings of existing research in a specific area b. To collect primary data for a new research study c. To analyze the data collected from a recent research study d. To conduct a pilot study before a full-scale research project Answer: a. To assess the quality and findings of existing research in a specific area

2. Question: Which type of research review involves a systematic and comprehensive search of existing literature? a. Systematic review b. Narrative review c. Scoping review d. Meta-analysis Answer: a. Systematic review

3. Question: What is a key step in conducting a systematic review of research in social work? a. Defining inclusion and exclusion criteria for studies b. Conducting interviews with participants c. Developing research hypotheses d. Creating new research instruments Answer: a. Defining inclusion and exclusion criteria for studies

4. Question: In a research review, what is the term for the process of identifying, appraising, and selecting relevant research studies? a. Literature search b. Data analysis c. Literature synthesis d. Literature screening Answer: d. Literature screening

5. Question: What is a potential limitation of a narrative review in social work research? a. Subjectivity in the selection and interpretation of studies b. Difficulty in collecting relevant studies c. Bias in participant selection d. Limited data availability Answer: a. Subjectivity in the selection and interpretation of studies

6. Question: Which type of research review aims to identify gaps in existing literature and provide an overview of research in a specific field? a. Scoping review b. Meta-analysis c. Systematic review d. Narrative review Answer: a. Scoping review

7. Question: What is a key advantage of using a meta-analysis in research review? a. It provides a quantitative summary of research findings across multiple studies b. It allows for a detailed narrative of research studies c. It ensures a broad overview of existing literature d. It focuses on qualitative analysis of studies Answer: a. It provides a quantitative summary of research findings across multiple studies

8. Question: What is a potential challenge when conducting a research review in social work? a. Availability of biased studies b. Difficulty in identifying relevant journals c. Lack of access to online databases d. Limited availability of research articles Answer: a. Availability of biased studies

9. Question: In a research review, what does the term "inclusion criteria" refer to? a. Specific characteristics that research studies must have to be included in the review b. The criteria for selecting research reviewers c. The criteria for conducting data analysis d. The criteria for publishing research studies Answer: a. Specific characteristics that research studies must have to be included in the review

10. Question: What is a primary objective of a scoping review in social work research? a. To map out existing research on a specific topic b. To conduct a detailed analysis of individual studies c. To identify statistically significant results in studies d. To replicate previous research studies Answer: a. To map out existing research on a specific topic

11. Question: What is the term for the process of combining and summarizing the findings from multiple research studies in a meta-analysis? a. Effect size calculation b. Data extraction c. Literature screening d. Sampling Answer: a. Effect size calculation

12. Question: What does the term "publication bias" refer to in a research review? a. The tendency for journals to publish studies with significant results b. The tendency for researchers to cite only recent studies c. The exclusion of non-English studies from the review d. The overrepresentation of qualitative studies in the review Answer: a. The tendency for journals to publish studies with significant results

13. Question: What is a potential benefit of conducting a research review in social work before starting a new research project? a. Avoiding duplication of research efforts and resources b. Acquiring primary data for the new research project c. Decreasing the time needed for the new research project d. Ensuring a larger sample size for the new research project Answer: a. Avoiding duplication of research efforts and resources

14. Question: In a research review, what does "synthesis of results" involve? a. Combining the findings from various studies to draw overall conclusions b. Conducting statistical tests on each individual study c. Creating graphical representations of research studies d. Ranking studies based on their publication date Answer: a. Combining the findings from various studies to draw overall conclusions

15. Question: What does the term "grey literature" refer to in a research review? a. Research materials not published in traditional academic sources, such as reports, theses, or conference papers b. Research articles written by inexperienced authors c. Studies that are not relevant to the research topic d. Research studies published in obscure journals Answer: a. Research materials not published in traditional academic sources, such as reports, theses, or conference papers

16. Question: What does the term "exclusion criteria" mean in a research review? a. Specific characteristics that disqualify research studies from being included in the review b. Criteria for selecting the research team c. Criteria for conducting qualitative analysis d. Criteria for selecting the research population Answer: a. Specific characteristics that disqualify research studies from being included in the review

17. Question: In a meta-analysis, what does "heterogeneity" refer to? a. The variability in study outcomes across different research studies b. The consistency in study outcomes across different research studies c. The number of studies included in the meta-analysis d. The overall effect size of the meta-analysis Answer: a. The variability in study outcomes across different research studies

18. Question: What is the primary objective of a systematic review in social work research? a. To minimize bias by using a systematic and transparent approach to collect and analyze research b. To generate new theories based on existing research c. To select studies based on the researcher's preferences and biases d. To conduct a quick review of existing literature Answer: a. To minimize bias by using a systematic and transparent approach to collect and analyze research

19. Question: What is a potential limitation of a scoping review in social work research? a. Lack of detailed critical appraisal of the included studies b. Difficulty in mapping out existing research in a specific field c. Limited availability of research studies for inclusion d. Subjectivity in selecting research studies Answer: a. Lack of detailed critical appraisal of the included studies

20. Question: What is the term for the process of summarizing the characteristics and findings of included studies in a research review? a. Data extraction b. Literature synthesis c. Effect size calculation d. Sampling Answer: a. Data extraction

21. Question: What is the term for the statistical measure used to represent the size of the effect in a meta-analysis? a. Effect size b. Sampling size c. Standard deviation d. Confidence interval Answer: a. Effect size

22. Question: What does the term "funnel plot" refer to in a meta-analysis? a. A graphical representation of the studies' effect sizes against their sample sizes b. A list of all studies included in the meta-analysis c. The process of selecting studies for the meta-analysis d. The systematic process of data extraction in a meta-analysis Answer: a. A graphical representation of the studies' effect sizes against their sample sizes

23. Question: In a research review, what does "search strategy" refer to? a. The plan for systematically searching and identifying relevant research studies b. The statistical methods used to analyze the data c. The criteria for including studies in the review d. The process of conducting interviews with participants Answer: a. The plan for systematically searching and identifying relevant research studies

24. Question: What is a potential advantage of using a narrative review in social work research? a. Flexibility in presenting research findings in a narrative format b. Quantitative summary of research findings across multiple studies c. Objective selection of studies based on inclusion criteria d. Minimization of researcher bias Answer: a. Flexibility in presenting research findings in a narrative format

25. Question: What does the term "forest plot" represent in a meta-analysis? a. A graphical representation of the individual study effect sizes and their confidence intervals b. A diagram illustrating the inclusion and exclusion criteria for studies c. A representation of the studies' publication dates d. A graphical summary of the effect size calculation process Answer: a. A graphical representation of the individual study effect sizes and their confidence intervals

26. Question: What does the term "bias" refer to in a research review? a. Systematic error in the collection or interpretation of research findings b. Unbiased selection of studies for the review c. Ethical considerations in research design d. Statistical errors in data analysis Answer: a. Systematic error in the collection or interpretation of research findings

27. Question: In a meta-analysis, what is the term for the extent to which a study's result is consistent with other studies' results? a. Homogeneity b. Heterogeneity c. Bias d. Effect size Answer: a. Homogeneity

28. Question: What does the term "quality assessment" involve in a research review? a. Evaluating the methodological rigor and overall quality of included studies b. Assessing the quantity of studies available on a particular topic c. Identifying the authors of included studies d. Assessing the relevance of studies to the research topic Answer: a. Evaluating the methodological rigor and overall quality of included studies

29. Question: What is a potential challenge when conducting a systematic review in social work research? a. High time and resource requirements b. Difficulty in summarizing research findings c. Limited availability of research studies d. Inconsistent inclusion and exclusion criteria Answer: a. High time and resource requirements

30. Question: What is the term for the process of combining the effect sizes of individual studies in a meta-analysis to obtain an overall estimate of the effect? a. Effect size calculation b. Effect size extraction c. Effect size synthesis d. Effect size screening Answer: c. Effect size synthesis

Recent Post

Popular posts.

• Top 7 Principle of Social Work
• Which of the following are the factors that affect learning?
• A Complete List of Important Days and Dates in August 2023
• 10 Principles of social group work
• Methods in Social Work and its concept
• 200 Social Work MCQ with Answer
• Mastering Perlman's Problem-Solving Approach: 20 Multiple Choice Questions Explained"
• 10 Vitiyagyan Mela Quiz 2024 with answers

For more information

• About SocialWorkin-Enabling Aspirants

Physical Review Research

• Collections
• Editorial Team
• Open Access

Entanglement signature in quantum work statistics in the slow-driving regime

Jian li, mark t. mitchison, and saulo v. moreira, phys. rev. research 6 , 033297 – published 13 september 2024.

• No Citing Articles
• INTRODUCTION
• THE WORK FDR PROTOCOL
• MULTIPARTITE WORK FDR PROTOCOL
• TWO-QUBIT EXAMPLE
• WORK FDR WITH GENERALIZED TWO-QUBIT…
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

In slowly driven classical systems, work is a stochastic quantity and its probability distribution is known to satisfy the work fluctuation-dissipation relation, which states that the mean and variance of the dissipated work are linearly related. Recently, it was shown that generation of quantum coherence in the instantaneous energy eigenbasis leads to a correction to this linear relation in the slow-driving regime. Here, we go even further by investigating nonclassical features of work fluctuations in setups with more than one system. To do this, we first generalize slow control protocols to encompass multipartite systems, allowing for the generation of quantum correlations during the driving process. Then, focusing on two-qubit systems, we show that entanglement generation leads to a positive contribution to the dissipated work, which is distinct from the quantum correction due to local coherence generation known from previous work. Our results show that entanglement generated during slow control protocols, e.g., as an unavoidable consequence of qubit crosstalk, comes at the cost of increased dissipation.

• Received 31 May 2024
• Accepted 15 August 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.033297

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by Bibsam .

Published by the American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

• Research Areas

Authors & Affiliations

• 1 Department of Physics, Lund University , Box 118, 22100 Lund, Sweden
• 2 School of Physics, Trinity College Dublin , College Green, Dublin 2, D02 K8N4, Ireland
• 3 Trinity Quantum Alliance, Unit 16, Trinity Technology and Enterprise Centre, Pearse Street, Dublin 2, D02YN67, Ireland
• * Contact author: [email protected]
• † Contact author: [email protected]
• ‡ Contact author: [email protected]

Article Text

Vol. 6, Iss. 3 — September - November 2024

Subject Areas

• Quantum Physics
• Statistical Physics

Authorization Required

Other options.

• Buy Article »
• Find an Institution with the Article »

Download & Share

Sketch of the TPM scheme in one step of the work FDR protocol for a two-qubit system. The system state π A ⊗ π B is projectively measured on the basis of H A B = H A ⊗ H B . The quench is then applied to the Hamiltonian, which becomes H A B ′ = H A ′ ⊗ H B ′ , while a unitary transformation described by R ̂ = R ̂ x x acts on the system state. Finally, the second measurement in the TPM scheme is performed on the basis of H A B ′ .

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

• Forgot your username/password?
• Create an account

Article Lookup

Paste a citation or doi, enter a citation.

• Request new password
• Create a new account

Marketing Research: Planning, Process, Practice

Student resources, multiple choice quizzes.

Try these quizzes to test your understanding.

1. Secondary research is about identifying ______ data, information and knowledge.

• easy-to-access

2. Secondary research relies upon ______ data, information and knowledge.

• tailor-made
• already existing

3. Data confidentiality should ______ be a concern when doing secondary research.

4. Internal data sources could be found in a ______.

• marketing information system
• annual report
• both marketing information system and annual report

5. Integration of internal data sources is often a(n) ______.

• opportunity

6. Syndicated services, databases and ______ sources are categories of external secondary data.

7. Professional bodies generated ______ data.

• both internal and external

8. Syndicated services are generally not ______ available.

9. Secondary data can ______ research questions.

• both answer and generate

10. Secondary data sources may not be ______.

• quick to obtain

11. Secondary research is a ______ process.

• superficial

12. Argument building is based on ______.

• individuality
• introspection

13. Referencing work helps with eliminating personal ______.

14. Theory in a literature review should be presented ______.

• in no particular order
• from the general to the specific
• according to personal opinion

15. A ‘funnel’ is a technique to critically review ______.

• secondary data
• primary data

16. Summarising is not a(n) ______ way to build literature reviews.

17. Each stage of secondary research should ______ the next.

18. The purpose of a ‘conclusion’ is to ______ one’s work.

• conceptualise

19. Secondary research is a(n) ______ process.

20. Criticality is needed when ______.

• both reading and writing