Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Peer review: Troubled from the start

Nature volume 532, pages 306–308 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Pivotal moments in the history of academic refereeing have occurred at times when the public status of science was being renegotiated, explains Alex Csiszar.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. W. Whewell to P. M. Roget, 22 March 1831; Royal Society of London Library [DM/1].

  2. J. W. Lubbock to W. Whewell, 27 January 1832; Trinity College Library, Cambridge [a/216/61].

  3. George Greenough Papers; University College London [Add. 7918/1621].

  4. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 3, 140–155 (1832).

  5. New Monthly Magazine 39, 2–6 (1833).

  6. Wade's London Rev. 1, 351–369 (1845).

  7. Nature 49, 563–564 (1894).

  8. Ziman, J. Public Knowledge: An Essay Concerning the Social Dimension of Science (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kaiser, D. Nature 505, 153–155 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Baldwin, M. Making Nature: The History of a Scientific Journal (Univ. Chicago Press, 2015).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alex Csiszar is associate professor of the history of science at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.,

    Alex Csiszar

Authors
  1. Alex Csiszar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex Csiszar.

Additional information

Tweet Facebook LinkedIn Weibo

Related links

Related links

Related links in Nature Research

Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors 2016-Feb-03

Peer review — reviewed 2014-Dec-22

Publishing: The peer-review scam 2014-Nov-26

The scientists who get credit for peer review 2014-Oct-09

Scientific publishing: Peer review, unmasked 2002-Mar-21

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Csiszar, A. Peer review: Troubled from the start. Nature 532, 306–308 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/532306a

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/532306a

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing
Morty Proxy This is a proxified and sanitized view of the page, visit original site.