Skip to main content
Kent Academic Repository

The Royal Society and the prehistory of peer review 1665-1965

Moxham, Noah, Fyfe, Aileen (2018) The Royal Society and the prehistory of peer review 1665-1965. The Historical Journal, 61 (4). pp. 863-889. ISSN 0018-246X. E-ISSN 1469-5103. (doi:10.1017/S0018246X17000334) (KAR id:65042)

PDF Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English
Download this file
(PDF/375kB)
[thumbnail of Peer review v30 AAM SUBMTD.pdf]
Preview
Request a format suitable for use with assistive technology e.g. a screenreader
Microsoft Word Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English

Restricted to Repository staff only
Contact us about this Publication
[thumbnail of Peer review v30 AAM SUBMTD.docx]
Official URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X17000334

Abstract

Despite 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’.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.1017/S0018246X17000334
Uncontrolled keywords: History of Science, Book history, Periodical History, Intellectual History, History of Scholarship, Peer Review, Royal Society
Subjects: D History General and Old World > D History (General) > D901 Europe (General)
D History General and Old World > DA Great Britain
Divisions: Divisions > Division of Arts and Humanities > School of History
Depositing User: Noah Moxham
Date Deposited: 07 Dec 2017 08:31 UTC
Last Modified: 04 Mar 2024 19:39 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/65042 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)

University of Kent Author Information

  • Depositors only (login required):

Total unique views for this document in KAR since July 2020. For more details click on the image.