Peer Review

Scientific research is validated when three conditions are satisfied: reproducibility, reproducibility and reproducibility. A journal peer review process does not reproduce research and therefore cannot verify findings.

What the peer review process does accomplish is to impede the timely publication of research which may impact the author(s) and the scientific discipline. Further, journal referees, who have not themselves conducted the experiments, can demand changes to a submission on condition the work will be refused publication if not instituted. It is the view of Shunderson Communications Inc. (SCInc.), that the journal peer review process is inherently designed to find fault and halt the publication process until the reviewer's demands have been met by the author(s). Unforeseen conflicts of interest may arise through the review process between the author and the reviewer(s), despite efforts to keep the parties anonymous, which may jeopardize the publishing of the work.

It is unclear what benefit peer review offers other than to selectively restrict some research from advancing or requesting onerous revisions that ultimately change the author's research focus or halt publication entirely. The peer review process is subjective at best and has not prevented bad research from being published in respected journals while disqualifying other quality submissions.

SCInc. no longer offers to peer review submissions for the reasons listed above. We welcome comments on any works forwarded and will append to the research in question if suitable. Our goal is to advance all forms of forensic research from all levels of researcher and institution and, ultimately, to let this work stand or fall, not through peer review but in a court of law.

Regardless of the established nature of a journal and its rigorous review process, regardless of the recognition of the authors and their standing in the academic community, all forensic research must be court qualified before it can be heard. The courtroom is the only true accreditation and certification process under which the validity of forensic research can be established. There is no other profession in the scientific community that undergoes the same routine assessment of scientific validity as frequently or as aggressively as the forensic sciences undergo in the courtroom. This is the purest form of peer review which has the greatest value to any research advanced and applied in a forensic investigation.

It is for these reasons that SCInc. openly invites non-peer reviewed works with the total confidence that these works will eventually be aggressively reviewed, not through the peer review process, but by the law community in a court of law where the importance of any research may impact on an individual's livelihood, reputation, and in some cases, their life.