System Integration

Dedicated to the dissemination of System Integration information

Refereed Papers

My definition of a ‘refereed’ paper is a paper, or article, that is released, and published, in the research field and comment invited.  You publish your paper then proactively seek comment on the validity of what you say; you put your paper up for public scrutiny.

 

This is good practise; hence it’s adoption by the research field.  If what you say cannot stand up to public scrutiny it is probably not worth people referring to it and using it in their own research. 

 

The comments can range from people having some minor disagreement with what you say to proving that you are talking absolute rubbish.  If someone just says that they have a minor disagreement with what you say your paper still has a lot of credibility, if they prove it is total rubbish it doesn’t.

 

Just because someone disagrees with what you are saying does not make you wrong and invalidate what you say, all that needs to happen is you make the comments available so people can make up their own mind.

 

Their can also be some argument even if someone proves you are completely wrong, there is always an argument over the exact circumstances of their information - they could be the ones who are wrong, not you.

 

If a paper, or article, or conference presentation, is refereed you are allowed to quote, or reference it, in a research paper, e.g. a dissertation, and everyone assumes that it is correct, it is taken as being true.  This could not be said of, say, information that you find on someone's web page, a refereed paper has a lot of validity, until it is proven to be wrong it is assumed it is correct.