Why should I believe it?
To sum it up, that is the main question everyone is asking when reviewing a paper.
However, when is it ok to accept the claims of the author?
Adapted from [1], I found this set of questions very helpful in determining whether to believe or not to believe:
- What is the paper about?
- What is the central claim?
- What would be a good set of arguments to substantiate this claim
- What are the actuals arguments brought forward by the author?
- Why does the author establish these specific arguments
- What is the quality of the arguments?
I think No. 3 is the most important question. Answering this question will also help in suggesting improvements in the review.
[1] Bördlein, C (2002): Das sockenfressende Monster in der Waschmaschine. Eine Einführung ins skeptische Denken (in German). Alibri, Aschaffenburg.
