2021 review
Why ex post peer review encourages high-risk research while ex ante review discourages it
[Review of ]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 118(52).
author keywords: Bayesian reasoning; decision theory; information theory; peer review; philosophy of science
TL;DR:
Ex ante and ex post peer review push investigators toward distinct sets of scientific questions because the tension arises because ex post review allows investigators to leverage their own scientific beliefs to generate results that others will find surprising, whereas ex ante review does not.
(via Semantic Scholar)
open access via www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (repository)
Source: Web Of Science
Added: January 18, 2022
Significance Science operates within social structures that govern and shape scientific activity. One such institution is peer review, which focuses attention on promising and interesting science while encouraging scientists to pursue some questions instead of others. Here, we show that ex ante review of proposals for future work and ex post review of completed science create different incentives for researchers. This tension creates a dilemma, because most researchers need to find projects that will survive both ex ante and ex post peer review. By unpacking this dynamic, we can understand how peer review shapes scientific activity and how changes to peer review might take science in unforeseen directions.