Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of “Peer Review” in the Cold War United States

@article{Baldwin2018ScientificAP,
  title={Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of “Peer Review” in the Cold War United States},
  author={M. Baldwin},
  journal={Isis},
  year={2018},
  volume={109},
  pages={538 - 558}
}
This essay traces the history of refereeing at specialist scientific journals and at funding bodies and shows that it was only in the late twentieth century that peer review came to be seen as a process central to scientific practice. Throughout the nineteenth century and into much of the twentieth, external referee reports were considered an optional part of journal editing or grant making. The idea that refereeing is a requirement for scientific legitimacy seems to have arisen first in the… Expand
Scholarly Review, Old and New
Scientific Grant Funding
Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy
  • Kyle Siler
  • Political Science, Computer Science
  • J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol.
  • 2020
Peer Review: Objectivity, Anonymity, Trust
  • D. Ucko
  • Psychology, Computer Science
  • ArXiv
  • 2020
The resilience of scientific publication: From elite ancient academies to open access
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-9 OF 9 REFERENCES
For recent studies of editorial influence see Tommaso Colussi
  • Credibility, Peer Review, and Nature
  • 2017
For studies suggesting that women and minorities fare poorly in the peer review process see Lutz Bornmann, Rüdiger Mutz, and Hans-Dieter Daniel
  • Journal of Infometrics
  • 2007
Eighth Report: Peer Review in Scientific Publications
  • Science and Technology Committee
For the concern that peer review procedures suppress innovative research see Paul Nightingale and Alister Scott
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Half Century of Peer Review