this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
9 points (100.0% liked)

Science

1 readers
7 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on scientific discoveries, research, and theories across various fields, including physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, and more. Whether you are a scientist, a science enthusiast, or simply curious about the world around us, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on a wide range of scientific topics. From the latest breakthroughs to historical discoveries and ongoing research, this category covers a wide range of topics related to science.

founded 2 years ago
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Actually, figures should be checked during the reviewing process. It's not an excuse.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yea, "should be", but as said, if it's not literally directly relevant even while being in the paper, it might get skipped. Lazy? Sure. Still understandable.

A more apt coding analogy might be code reviewing unit tests. Why dig in to the unit tests if they're passing and it seems to work already? Lazy? Yes. Though it happens far more than most non-anonymous devs would care to admit!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

No, "should be" as in, it must be reviewed but can be skipped if there's a concern like revealing the author identity in a double-blind process.