|
==History== The first recorded editorial pre-publication peer-review process was at the Royal Society of London in 1665 by the founding editor of ''Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society'', Henry Oldenburg.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Rescuing Science from Politics )〕〔(On Being a Scientist ''National Academies Press'' )〕〔(The Origin of the Scientific Journal and the Process of Peer Review ''House of Commons Select Committee Report'' )〕 In the 20th century, peer review became common for science funding allocations. This process appears to have developed independently from that of editorial peer review.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Rescuing Science from Politics )〕 See a competing understanding of the history of peer review using a scientific approach in Gaudet,〔()〕 that builds on historical research by Gould, Biagioli,〔 〕 Spier,〔 〕 and Rip.〔 〕 Using a scientific approach means carefully tending to what is under investigation, here peer review, and not only looking at superficial or self-evident commonalities among inquisition, censorship, and journal peer review. The first peer-reviewed publication might have been the ''Medical Essays and Observations'' published by the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1731. The present-day peer-review system evolved from this 18th-century process, began to involve external reviewers in the mid-19th-century, and did not become commonplace until the mid-20th-century. Peer review has long been a touchstone of the scientific method, but until the end of the 19th century it had been performed by editors in chief or editorial committees. While some medical journals then started to systematically appoint external reviewers, it is only since the middle of the 20th century that this practice has spread widely and that these reviewers have been given some visibility within academic journals, often being thanked by authors and editors. In earlier periods, editors of scientific journals often made publication decisions without seeking outside input. For example, Albert Einstein's revolutionary ''Annus Mirabilis'' papers in the 1905 issue of ''Annalen der Physik'' were peer-reviewed by the journal's editor-in-chief, Max Planck, and its co-editor, Wilhelm Wien, both future Nobel prize winners and together experts on the topics of these papers. An external panel of reviewers was not sought, contrary to what is now done for many scientific journals. Established authors and editors were then given more latitude in their journalistic discretion. On another occasion, Einstein was severely critical of the external review process, saying that he had not authorized the editor in chief to show his manuscript "to specialists before it is printed", and informing him that he would "publish the paper elsewhere". An editorial in ''Nature'' published in 2003 stated that "in journals in those days, the burden of proof was generally on the opponents rather than the proponents of new ideas.". The journal ''Nature'' instituted formal peer review only in 1967. The first Peer Review Congress met in 1989. Over time, the fraction of papers devoted to peer review has steadily declined, suggesting that as a field of sociological study, it has been replaced by more systematic studies of bias and errors.〔 In parallel with these 'common experience' definitions based on the study of peer review as a pre-constructed process, there are a few scientific understandings of peer review that do not look at peer review as pre-constructed. Hirschauer proposed that journal peer review can be understood as reciprocal accountability of judgements among peers.〔 〕 Gaudet proposed that journal peer review could be understood as a social form of boundary judgement - determining what can be considered as scientific (or not) set against an overarching knowledge system, and following predecessor forms of inquisition and censorship.〔(http://www.ruor.uottawa.ca )〕〔(http://www.ruor.uottawa.ca )〕 Pragmatically, peer review refers to the work done during the screening of submitted manuscripts. This process encourages authors to meet the accepted standards of their discipline and reduces the dissemination of irrelevant findings, unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations, and personal views. Publications that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by academic scholars and professionals. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Scholarly peer review」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|