Answer:
The correct approach is Option B (Peer Review).
Step-by-step explanation:
- Rather made reference to someone as a scientific peer-review, it encourages the specialist who has not been essential to the study team to analyze the study objectively and pointed out everyone's mistakes. It serves as major self-regulation for scholars and aims to make the publishing process somewhat credible. Hence, the solution to this issue is Peer Examination.
- Funding organizations rarely have the capabilities to recognize out mistakes, whereas definitive analysis is a method of study that helps to make a definitive statement. The gathering of data is simply a process of scientific study.
Other approaches do not apply to the example mentioned. Although the one mentioned is right.