3 ms·
"Peer review" these days usually refers to pre-publication peer review. This is the mainstream usage, as demonstrated by Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wik
by areyousure 5y ago
"Peer review" these days usually refers to pre-publication peer review. This is the mainstream usage, as demonstrated by Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review#Scholarly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review#Scholarly or even better by Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/peer_review https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/peer_review
However, I agree that in the context of this thread, post-publication peer review -- usually referred to by another name -- is very important, as it plays a strong role in the formation of consensus being discussed.
- godelski 5y agoThat's the usual case, but not the only case. Like you said, publication review didn't happen back then. But yet peer review has still been happening in science for thousands of years. People still judge researchers based on h-index, which just means number of citations. Yeah, publishing in high impact conferences helps influence that, but it isn't necessary to the process. But peer review (in the more broader sense) is still essential to the process of science. Publication review is really only one step in the peer review process.