Peer Review

The transcript discusses the contrasting reactions of historians and physicists to a book initially intended to blend history and science. The book, 'Worlds in Collision,' was transformed into a science book due to its reception. The transcript also explores the evolution of peer review, highlighting its role in publishing decisions and how it has shifted from advisory to gatekeeping. The discussion includes the historical context of peer review and its impact on the perception of scientific work.

How did historians react to the book 'Worlds in Collision'?

• They largely ignored it.

• They were confused by it.

• They celebrated it as a breakthrough.

• They embraced it enthusiastically.

What was the original intention behind the book 'Worlds in Collision'?

• To be a science book with history claims.

• To be a fictional narrative.

• To be a history book with science claims.

• To be a purely scientific text.

What decision did the editor James Putnam make regarding the publication of 'Worlds in Collision'?

• To publish the history and science arguments together.

• To delay the publication indefinitely.

• To publish the science part first and the history part later.

• To publish only the history part.

What was the primary reason the book 'Worlds in Collision' was cleared during peer review?

• It was a groundbreaking scientific discovery.

• It was scientifically accurate.

• It was historically accurate.

• It was expected to sell well and spark discussion.

How did the peer review process evolve as a result of incidents like the publication of 'Worlds in Collision'?

• It became more about ensuring scientific accuracy.

• It started focusing on the potential for commercial success.

• It became less important in publishing.

• It evolved into a gatekeeping process.