In Referees We Trust? The Origins of Peer Review

In this talk, I trace the development of refereeing from its origins in the early nineteenth century through the late twentieth century, and show that it was only during the 1960s and 1970s that peer review (a term that itself arose in the 1960s) 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. But in the US in the 1970s, American scientists wanted to ensure their continuing influence over funding decisions in the wake of attacks on the expert advice funding agencies like the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. To protect their role in federal grantmaking, scientists and their supporters cast peer review as the crucial process that ensured the credibility of science as a whole.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2024-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14098439
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

In Referees We Trust? The Origins of Peer Review

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
article

In Referees We Trust? The Origins of Peer Review

article en

Abstract

In this talk, I trace the development of refereeing from its origins in the early nineteenth century through the late twentieth century, and show that it was only during the 1960s and 1970s that peer review (a term that itself arose in the 1960s) 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. But in the US in the 1970s, American scientists wanted to ensure their continuing influence over funding decisions in the wake of attacks on the expert advice funding agencies like the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. To protect their role in federal grantmaking, scientists and their supporters cast peer review as the crucial process that ensured the credibility of science as a whole.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.