Science Atlas

How We Know What We Know
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Concept

Peer Review

Formal Sciences

Peer review is the practice of having independent experts in a field examine a claimed finding before it is published, checking its method and reasoning rather than taking the author's word for it. Its earliest institutional home is the Royal Society's journal Philosophical Transactions, begun in 1665, which had its Council review submissions before printing them, though single-blind and double-blind review by named external referees in the modern sense developed gradually over the eighteenth through twentieth centuries rather than arriving fully formed. It remains contested: reviewers disagree, bias by reviewer prestige or institution is documented, and it has repeatedly failed to catch fraud, but no replacement mechanism commands comparable trust across the sciences.

Facts
Proposed Year
1665 1
The founding year of Philosophical Transactions, the earliest journal credited with institutionalising external review before publication; the practice itself developed gradually rather than starting fully formed on this date.
Proposed By
Henry Oldenburg 2
Connections

Associated With

Reproducibility, Concepts

Peer review is a check intended to help ensure published results are reproducible

Belongs To

Source Peer Review (Wikipedia)

Proposed By

Philosophical Transactions, begun by the Royal Society in 1665, is the earliest journal credited with institutionalising review before publication.

Source Peer Review (Britannica)

Studied In

Source Peer Review (Britannica)
Sources
1. Peer Review (Britannica)
Encyclopaedia BritannicaView the Source
2. Peer Review (Wikipedia)
Wikipedia
  • History section
    Henry Oldenburg (1619-1677) was a German-born British philosopher who is seen as the father of modern scientific peer review.
  • Belongs To: Philosophy of Science, Lead, sentence 1
    Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (peers).
View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.