Does the Need for Agreement Among Reviewers Inhibit the Publication of Controversial Findings?

Abstract

Controversial empirical papers are expected to receive harsh treatment in peer review, but our survey indicates that such works occasionally get published, sometimes without much peer agreement. More can be done to encourage publication, however. We suggest ways to accomplish this, in particular, the use of an advocacy procedure that explicitly recognizes the need to promote this type of research.

Keywords: Publication review, controversial emperical research, publication