Abstract

The concept of peer review, in the form of the submission of manuscripts to refereed journals, is analysed. Standard received sociological and philosophical accounts of the place of peer review in the production of knowledge are summarized and critiqued. An alternative 'constructivist' account is given, and this account is also critiqued. An account of the 'Social Text Affair' is given, and it is argued that the affair is instructive for understanding the place of peer review in the production of knowledge. An account of the author's communications with the editors of Ulrich's International Directory of Periodicals about Social Text is given. Finally, the sociological concept of 'boundary work' is introduced, and it is concluded that peer review is a form of 'boundary work.'

pdf

Share