Scientists often work on projects for a long time and fail to see sources of error in their research. Which process allows an outside expert to look at the scientist's project and point to sources of error? direct funding peer review conclusive research data collection

The correct approach is Option B (Peer Review).

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.

Wish i can but don’t know this