Why Is Peer Review Important? |
The peer-review process is how new information is created. Serious scientists and scholars of all stripes share something in common: an attempt to create new information. New information has to pass a rigorous gauntlet that is unique in the publishing world. Peer-review is not about a writer "getting a gig" or satisfying a fanbase; rather, it's an attempt to answer a relevant question that shines new light on a specific topic, adding to the corpus of human knowledge.
For centuries, nearly the whole of the human knowledge base--in the western world, anyway--was passed down via the written corpus of Greek, Hebrew, and Latin texts. The entire gamut of scholastic knowledge, ranging from political philosophy to ideas on nature to poetics to mathematics to architecture, was contained in scrolls. It really wasn't until the fifteenth century that ancient knowledge could be tested, or indeed challenged. Ptolemy, for instance, had held sway for thousands of years. Then Copernicus undid this Earth-centered perspective. On the other hand, some ideas--like Euclid's geometry--are still taught in schools today. These ideas from antiquity have been peer reviewed. Some have survived (Euclid), some have survived with adjustments (Aristotle), and some have been tossed out in total (sorry, Ptolemy). Euclid's geometry is a block at the base of the pyramid of knowledge. The pyramid has been a work in progress since antiquity. Just when a piece feels like it fits into place, it falls to the ground, failing to stand the test of time. Other stones set in position perfectly. Some last for generations, then wear out. Some can be refashioned with age. All in all, the pyramid has grown considerably since scholars and scientists first started to enscribe their ideas.
So how does a stone get added to the pyramid of knowledge? Well, through rigorous research, testing, and publication. This process is the peer-review process. How does it work? A unique feature of the peer-review process is its anonymity. A paper is submitted to an editor at the journal. The editor, in turn, submits the paper to reviewers. The reviewers do not know who the author of the paper is. Peer review is not about friends, colleagues, or name recognition. Rather, peer review boils down to a simple formula: has the author of this paper asked a relevant question? If so, has the author produced any findings? If so, has the author demonstrated that those findings are based on a sound methodology? The process is called "peer review" because the work is reviewed by peers in the same field. For instance, a paper on coral reefs will be submitted to a journal in marine biology. The journal's reviewers are marine biologists. Therefore, the author of the paper will have to demonstrate to other marine biologists that this work is of merit. The other marine biologists might provide very specific feedback on the paper, and the author will have to modify the work to clarify a point or to accomodate questions or criticisms. They might even say outright that the paper is not appropriate because the questions discussed are irrelevant or the findings are based on shoddy numbers. Yes, it's hard.
Okay, so how is the peer-review process different from the popular press. Well, it's different in about every different way. The following table illustrates some of the differences.
| Factor | Peer Review | Popular Press |
| Content includes advertisements | rarely or never | always |
| The purpose of the resource is to | create new information | be commercially successful |
| The writing style is | technical | fun, catchy, and witty |
| The publication's appearance is | black letters on white paper | Glossy and full-color |
| The publication's audience is | specialists in the field | as many people as possible |
| Authors are | specialists in the field | engaging, witty, and creative |
| Bibliographies are | required | optional |
| Anecdotes are | not appropriate | really helpful |
| The publication | does not pay authors | pays authors |
Once you get a feel for the differences, you will be able to tell if a publication is popular or peer-reviewed. The popular press, is, well, popular. These are the glossy magazines in the check-out aisle at the store. People and Better Homes and Gardens are examples of popular magazines. They are not meant to be scholarly. They are not meant to find generate new knowledge. They are meant to readable, helpful, and informative while also being engaging, humorous, and fun. What about a highly-informational magazine like National Geographic? Yes, National Geographic is a highly-informative and enriching magazine. However, it is not peer-reviewed. The editorial process is very similar to People magazine: National Geographic needs interesting content that will attract attention. It needs experienced writers who know how to turn a phrase, build drama, or insert a clever laugh into the prose. There ain't nothing wrong with National Geographic; it's one of my favorites. I actually collect National Geographic. It just isn't peer-reviewed, and that's fine. What National Geographic does very well is take topics that are scholarly (Ancient Egypt, Thailand, blue whales, etc.) and they widen the appeal of these otherwise subject-specific themes. Not bad. Peer-reviewed journals are not magazines. They are (usually) quite plain looking, and they are usually found in university libraries or accessed through a library database. Even if they were in hte check-out aisle at the grocery store, they would not be able to compete with glossy magazines like People. But that's okay, because they are not trying to compete with People. Peer-reviewed journals have an entirely different object with an entirely different audience. The object is not to sell one million copies of a magazine issue; rather, the object is to convince scholars and scientists in a field that a specific question has been answered.
Peer review journals--like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, and Nature--have the unique position of creating new information. Many of the articles will never gain attention. Some, however, will attract attention from other scholars, and an idea is reproduced. It is tested in the waters of printed scholarly discourse. Soon, an idea that was once new and original, may become common. The growth of human knowledge since the fifteenth century is directly correlated to the development of universities and the peer-review process. The Royal Society's Transactions has operated for centuries, and its published papers include authors like Isaac Newton. In order for an idea to be taken seriously, it must run the gauntlet of peer review. And little by little, a new stone is cobbled onto the growing pyramid of knowledge. Updated August 2019 Back to the top of the page