In the 1950s, the Royal Society asked reviewers to answer general questions, including whether the research contained “contributions to knowledge of sufficient scientific interest” and whether the society should publish it.
These questions may give short answers to even the most important things of the work. Chemist Dorothy Hodgkin wrote nearly 50 words when asked to review the complete manuscript of the structure of DNA by Francis Crick and James Watson in 1953, which was published in 1953. Proceedings of the Royal Society in April 19541. (A short paper announcing the discovery had appeared inside The environment2.)
In his own comment, beyond the many yes and no answers, Hodgkin suggests that the two should “touch up” the images to remove the disturbing reflection of the “chairs on the perspex rod” – a technical adjustment that modern cameras usually do. Crick and Watson seem to be following the advice.
The archive is also full of long reports, many handwritten. In 1877, reviewer Robert Clifton finished a 24-page report on two related papers on optics, apologizing: “How you will hate me for troubling you with this long book, but I hope that before we meet time will have appeased your anger.” .”
Ferlier says that the introduction of standardized referee questions has significantly reduced the time and effort required by reviewers. “There is this understanding in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that peer review is a real conversation,” he said. “After that, it becomes a way to manage the entry of journal papers.”
The article, by David Adam in Nature, is interesting throughout. Written by Mike Rosenwald.
Source link