This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David A. Kronick, PhD

JAMA. 1990;263(10):1321-1322.

Abstract
Although the beginnings of "peer review" are frequently associated with the Royal Society of London when it took over official responsibility for the Philosophical Transactions in 1752, antecedents of peer review practices go back to the 17th century. Despite the differences in the academic, social, intellectual, and economic environments of the 18th century and today, we can find interesting and instructive similarities in the way early editors defined and exercised their prerogatives and responsibilities. These concerns extend to ideas and practices that are closely related to what we call peer review or refereeing today.

(JAMA. 1990;263:1321-1322)

Author Affiliations
From the Briscoe Library, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.

Footnotes
Presented at The First International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, Chicago, Ill, May 10-12, 1989.

Reprint requests to the Briscoe Library, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr, San Antonio, TX 78284 (Dr Kronick).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Successful Authors and Effective Reviewers: Balancing Supply and Demand in the Organizational Sciences
Tsui and Hollenbeck
Organizational Research Methods 2009;12:259-275.
ABSTRACT  

Kudos
Reider
Am J Sports Med 2008;36:2287-2288.
FULL TEXT  

The ups and downs of peer review
Benos et al.
Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2007;31:145-152.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The impact factor of seven orthopaedic journals: FACTORS INFLUENCING IT
Hakkalamani et al.
J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006;88-B:159-162.
FULL TEXT  

Peer Review and Professionalism at the Archives of Internal Medicine
Emanuel and Greenland
Arch Intern Med 2005;165:2559-2560.
FULL TEXT  

Changing Ethical Standards in Scientific Publication
Brand et al.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2004;12:296-297.
FULL TEXT  

Changing Ethical Standards in Scientific Publication
Brand et al.
JBJS 2004;86:1855-1856.
FULL TEXT  

The significance of the peer review process against the background of bias: priority ratings of reviewers and editors and the prediction of citation, the role of geographical bias
Opthof et al.
Cardiovasc Res 2002;56:339-346.
FULL TEXT  

Effects of Editorial Peer Review: A Systematic Review
Jefferson et al.
JAMA 2002;287:2784-2786.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Measuring the Quality of Editorial Peer Review
Jefferson et al.
JAMA 2002;287:2786-2790.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The New Millennium: time for a change!
Holzel and Van Diest
J. Clin. Pathol. 2000;53:1-2.
FULL TEXT  

Structural Transformations of the Sciences and the End of Peer Review
Judson
JAMA 1994;272:92-94.
ABSTRACT  

Is There Gender Bias in JAMA's Peer Review Process?
Gilbert et al.
JAMA 1994;272:139-142.
ABSTRACT  

Scientific Misconduct in Environmental Science and Toxicology
Nigg and Radulescu
JAMA 1994;272:168-170.
ABSTRACT  

Electronic Journals and Duplicate Publication Is a Byte a Word?
Flanagin et al.
JAMA 1992;267:2374-2374.
ABSTRACT  

Editorial
Brumback
J Child Neurol 1991;6:193-195.
 

The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review
Burnham
JAMA 1990;263:1323-1329.
ABSTRACT  

The Communities of Scientists and Journal Peer Review
Knoll
JAMA 1990;263:1330-1332.
ABSTRACT