Is Peer Review Overrated?

The Monist 79 (4):536-563 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Anyone who labors at academic scholarship knows vividly—perhaps even painfully—how dependent that enterprise is on a system of peer review. A scholar submits a work to a journal, press, or conference committee, or sends a proposal to a foundation; the submission is then evaluated by other professionals. The judgment of these referees determines whether the work is published by the target journal or press, appears on the conference program, or is funded by the desired institution. In many fields the overwhelming majority of submissions are rejected. Careers are thus often made or destroyed by the process.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The principles and practices of Peer review.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin - 2013 - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1):2-17.
‘Peer review’ culture.Malcolm Atkinson - 2001 - Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (2):193-204.
Happiness Is Overrated. [REVIEW]John Lemos - 2004 - Review of Metaphysics 58 (2):423-425.
Ethical issues in journal Peer-review.J. Angelo Corlett - 2005 - Journal of Academic Ethics 2 (4):355-366.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
56 (#274,303)

6 months
4 (#698,851)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Shatz
Yeshiva University

Citations of this work

The Role of Philosophy in Academic Ethics.J. Angelo Corlett - 2014 - Journal of Academic Ethics 12 (1):1-14.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references