Is Peer Review a Good Idea?

Heesen, R. & Bright, L. K., 3-Jul-2019, In : British journal for the philosophy of science.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Prepublication peer review should be abolished. We consider the effects that such a change will have on the social structure of science, paying particular attention to the changed incentive structure and the likely effects on the behaviour of individual scientists. We evaluate these changes from the perspective of epistemic consequentialism. We find that where the effects of abolishing prepublication peer review can be evaluated with a reasonable level of confidence based on presently available evidence, they are either positive or neutral. We conclude that on present evidence abolishing peer review weakly dominates the status quo.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBritish journal for the philosophy of science
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 3-Jul-2019


  • Philosophy of science, Peer review, Social epistemology, Credit economy
Related Prizes
  1. Organizing Science: The Social Epistemology of Scientists and their Incentives

    Remco Heesen (Recipient), Jul-2016

    Prize: Fellowship awarded competitivelyAcademic

  2. Understanding Statistical Biases in Peer Review

    Remco Heesen (Recipient), 2018

    Prize: Fellowship awarded competitivelyAcademic

View all (2) »

ID: 101953184