Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorMoxham, Noah
dc.contributor.authorFyfe, Aileen
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-10T17:30:12Z
dc.date.available2017-07-10T17:30:12Z
dc.date.issued2018-12
dc.identifier.citationMoxham , N & Fyfe , A 2018 , ' The Royal Society and the prehistory of peer review, 1665-1965 ' The Historical Journal , vol. 61 , no. 4 , 863 , pp. 863-889 . https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X17000334en
dc.identifier.issn0018-246X
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 245601993
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: aa7a7ca7-a40c-496c-bd10-34a8a731e3af
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85034606892
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-6794-4140/work/55643911
dc.identifier.otherWOS: 000447882600001
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/11178
dc.descriptionThe research for this paper was funded by the Arts & Humanities Research Council, grant AH/K001841/1en
dc.description.abstractDespite being coined only in the early 1970s, ‘peer review’ has become a powerful rhetorical concept in modern academic discourse, tasked with ensuring the reliability and reputation of scholarly research. Its origins have commonly been dated to the foundation of the Philosophical Transactions in 1665, or to early learned societies more generally, with little consideration of the intervening historical development. It is clear from our analysis of the Royal Society's editorial practices from the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries that the function of refereeing, and the social and intellectual meaning associated with scholarly publication, has historically been quite different from the function and meaning now associated with peer review. Refereeing emerged as part of the social practices associated with arranging the meetings and publications of gentlemanly learned societies in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Such societies had particular needs for processes that, at various times, could create collective editorial responsibility, protect institutional finances, and guard the award of prestige. The mismatch between that context and the world of modern, professional, international science, helps to explain some of the accusations now being levelled against peer review as not being ‘fit for purpose’.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofThe Historical Journalen
dc.rights[Accepted Version] Copyright © 2017, Cambridge University Press. The author created, accepted manuscript following peer review may differ slightly from the final published version. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. The final published version of this work is available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X17000334en
dc.subjectPeer Reviewen
dc.subjectScientific journalsen
dc.subjectScientific publishingen
dc.subjectRoyal Societyen
dc.subjectResearch evaluationen
dc.subjectD History General and Old Worlden
dc.subjectQ Scienceen
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.subjectBDCen
dc.subject.lccDen
dc.subject.lccQen
dc.titleThe Royal Society and the prehistory of peer review, 1665-1965en
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPostprinten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of Historyen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X17000334
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journalen


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record