Scholars working on the history of human experimentation have long puzzled over the neglect of medical research ethics in the first two decades after World War II, a period that saw a vast increase in human experimentation in medicine but that seems to have been characterized by a lack of moral leadership among physicians. This essay reexamines this notion by drawing on ethical debates about human experimentation in the Dutch medical profession between 1945 and 1971. In the international literature, Dutch (...) physicians are often singled out as having been exceptionally quick to note the need for better research ethics after World War II. This essay, however, shows that it is a mistake to identify these Dutch concerns as one of those exceptions that ultimately proves the rule. Instead, the Dutch ethics discourse developed in this period sought to carve out a legitimate space for “good medical research,” where “good” stood simultaneously for “methodologically valid” and “ethically just” and where research ethics committees were imagined to function as epistemic filters that would increase both the quality and the quantity of human experimentation in medicine. This connection between ethics and episteme has hitherto received little attention in the history of research ethics governance but remains a core element of medical research ethics today. (shrink)

This article examines the evolution of peer review and the modern editorial processes of scholarly journals by analyzing a novel data set derived from the Royal Society’s archives and covering 1865-1965, that is, the historical period in which refereeing became firmly established. Our analysis reveals how the Royal Society’s editorial processes coped with both an increasing reliance on refereeing and a growth in submissions, while maintaining collective responsibility and minimizing research waste. By engaging more of its fellows in editorial activity, (...) the society was able to establish an equilibrium of number of submissions per reviewer that was relatively stable over time. Nevertheless, our analysis shows that the distribution of editorial work was significantly uneven. Our findings reveal interesting parallels with current concerns about the scale and distribution of peer review work and suggest the strategic importance of the management of the editorial process to achieve a creative mix of community commitment and professional responsibility that is essential in contemporary journals. (shrink)