Do you see value in the peer review process, as outlined in Chapter 1 of your text? Between the New England Journal of Medicine, your local newspaper, and a television news report, which do you believe is a more credible source? Why? Explain your method of evaluation in determining if a source is reliable. This Assignment above is already complete your next assignment is to: Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts. You Must Provide Feedback on what they have written. “Each response should be a minimum of 200 words and should include your thoughts associated with their posted information. Additionally, you are to contribute to the discussion by adding support or constructive alternatives to your classmates’ posts. “ First Student Response from Keisha Hinton I do see great value in the peer review process. In my opinion, this is the most academic and credible of ways of reporting information. If something is to be reported as fact and digested by the community as such, there should be a rigorous process in place for identifying flaws in logic, methodology, or reporting. This is extremely valuable given how easily content can be published nowadays. Hundreds and thousands of bloggers all over the world are instantly able to post their thoughts and musings on the internet for the rest of the world to see. This easy publication ability creates the reality that for the average internet user, it is often difficult to tell what is true and what is biased due to opinion. The peer review process, as such, is a great tool for ensuring that the information reported is quality and is reported in an unbiased way. (Gaensslen & Larsen, 2013) Between the options provided, I believe the New England Journal of Medicine to be a more reliable source. This is because the journal goes through a peer review process which takes some of the best academic minds and allows them to scrutinize what goes into the journal before it's published. This is a very valuable tool, for me personally. Even before I did this week's readings in this class, I've known on some level how valuable peer review is. To determine if a source is credible, I first see if it's peer reviewed. If it is not, I think about the bias that may have affected the writer's fact-reporting. I also think about if I know anything about the source to make in not credible. For instance, Fox News is traditionally right wing, while MSNBC is traditionally left. These two news agencies have allowed their political affiliations to largely skew their reporting of facts and their news stories. Thus, I'm not readily convinced about something I see on these news channels, or websites. References: Gaensslen, R.E., & Larsen, K. (2013). Introductory forensic science. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Second Student Response from Frank Rameriz I see the value of the peer review process as it pertains to the field of science. Science is based on tangible quantifiable propertie ...