"The first referee systems that we would recognize as such were set in place by English scientific societies in the early nineteenth century. But these referees were never intended to play the part of supreme scientific gatekeepers. That notion emerged in around 1900 (see 'Past notes'). It was exactly then that some began to wonder whether referee systems might be fundamentally flawed. In this sense, peer review has always been broken."
@cyrilpedia fun Einstein story about how he was once peer-reviewed (not with his consent!) in 1937, and retracted the submission indignantly rather than answer the queries (and lots happened after that also, Einstein was 'wrong').
A tale of peer review norms, of benefits, and arguably highlights how in this instance, those benefits were an exception to a system that otherwise let ideas be the sole ideas of the authors.
#PeerReview #AcademicChatter
https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/58/9/43/399405/Einstein-Versus-the-Physical-Review-A-great
@MarkHanson Yeah, this anecdote is great - it features in 11 out of 10 histories of peer review :)
