Abstract

Many have criticized the peer-review system employed in scientific publication because of the apparent lack of inter-referee reliability. It is often remarked that if referees cannot agree about the quality of a scientific manuscript, then the selection of manuscripts for publication is arbitrary. Some critics have even called for abolishing pre-publication peer-review. I argue that too much emphasis has been put on inter-referee reliability. As such, a lack of inter-referee reliability in the current peer-review system is not damning for the system. I argue that peer review is effective at finding mistakes.

https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00639