Question

a blog post published on google by a high school student and reviewed by her friend is included as a citation in a science paper. is this source considered a peer - reviewed paper? why or why not?
a) this is considered a peer - reviewed paper because it was reviewed by a student peer.

b) this isnt considered a peer - reviewed paper because peer - reviewed papers are published only in books.

c) this isnt considered a peer - reviewed paper because it wasnt reviewed by other scientists in the field.

d) this is considered a peer - reviewed paper because the variables used were reviewed by other scientists to make sure

Explanation:

Peer - reviewed papers are reviewed by experts (scientists) in the relevant field to ensure quality and validity. A blog post reviewed by a friend (a student, not an expert in the science field) doesn't meet this criterion. Option A is wrong as a student peer isn't a field - expert. Option B is wrong as peer - reviewed papers can be in journals too, not just books. Option D has no basis as there's no info about variable review by scientists. Option C correctly states that it's not peer - reviewed as it lacked review by field scientists.

Answer:

C) This isn't considered a peer - reviewed paper because it wasn't reviewed by other scientists in the field.