When Muhly was about three, Harvey painted his portrait; in it, he stands, blond and serious-looking, in a field, peering through tall grasses, next to the ghostly outline of an erased maternal figure.
With niche acquisitions complementing attractive positions in fast-growing markets, Oil States International is outperforming its oil field peers.
Therefore, through the use of digital consensual assessment, the subjective expert opinion of a faculty expert is supported by the assessment of non-experts with an interest in the field (peers).
When a manuscript is submitted, reviewers who are researching and publishing work in the same field (peers) are asked to evaluate the content of the manuscript (e.g., significance and originality of the research findings) and recommend to the editor that the manuscript be published, revised and then published, or rejected [1].
In the majority of the studies conducted in this field peers or near peers teach small groups [ 5, 12, 13].
This resulted in a wide range of community support initiatives (e.g. community health workers, community care workers, lay health workers, treatment buddies, field officers, peer educators/counsellors, adherence supporters, etc).
To demonstrate rigour in our research we will draw upon the following 'validation strategies' for qualitative research: [ 27] 1) prolonged engagement in the field; 2) peer review and debriefing; 3) negative case analysis; 4) clarifying researcher bias; 5) member checking; and 6) rich, thick description which enables readers to make decisions about transferability.
Same-field peer review would become a bitter arena of scientific contentions and inter-personal conflicts.
However, in the midst of the intensifying global competition for research funding and publication resources, same-field peer review practice would tend to put the peer reviewer and the author in a positional conflict of interest, thus tempting them to risk one's reviewer anonymity to undermine or block other's work to be published (Matthews 2016).
Despite being widely accepted as the best way to filter low-quality research, to detect flaws in scientific communications and to improve papers with significant contributions to their fields [1] [3], peer review has also raised many criticisms [4] [6].
Wu parked his bike, looked at me in my field rags, peered inside the gloom of my hut, grunted.
