Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Peer Review and Natural-Like Social Relations of Production in Academia.Luis Arboledas-Lérida - forthcoming - Social Epistemology.
    There is a paucity of studies addressing the nature of the social relations of production prevailing in academia prior to the commodification of academic research. By filling that gap, this paper enables us to better understand the historical presuppositions from which the process of knowledge commodification in academia has evolved. Our theoretically informed analysis will focus on peer review, given that it is one of the few academic practices where traces of that historical past can still be found. On the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Editors, referees, and committees: Distributing editorial work at the Royal Society journals in the late 19th and 20th centuries. [REVIEW]Aileen Fyfe - 2020 - Centaurus 62 (1):125-140.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Journal Peer Review and Editorial Evaluation: Cautious Innovator or Sleepy Giant?Serge P. J. M. Horbach & Willem Halffman - 2020 - Minerva 58 (2):139-161.
    Peer review of journal submissions has become one of the most important pillars of quality management in academic publishing. Because of growing concerns with the quality and effectiveness of the system, a host of enthusiastic innovators has proposed and experimented with new procedures and technologies. However, little is known about whether these innovations manage to convince other journal editors. This paper will address open questions regarding the implementation of new review procedures, the occurrence rate of various peer review procedures and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Editorial Work and the Peer Review Economy of STS Journals.Maria Amuchastegui, Kean Birch & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner - 2022 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 47 (4):670-697.
    In this paper, we analyze the role of science and technology studies journal editors in organizing and maintaining the peer review economy. We specifically conceptualize peer review as a gift economy running on perpetually renewed experiences of mutual indebtedness among members of an intellectual community. While the peer review system is conventionally presented as self-regulating, we draw attention to its vulnerabilities and to the essential curating function of editors. Aside from inherent complexities, there are various shifts in the broader political–economic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations