M. Baldwin, Tyndall and Stokes: Correspondence, Referee Reports and the Physical Sciences in Victorian Britain, The Age of Scientific Naturalism: Tyndall and His Contemporaries, pp.171-86, 2014.

M. Baldwin, Credibility, Peer Review, and Nature, 1945-1990, Notes and Records of the Royal Society, vol.69, issue.3, pp.337-52, 2015.

M. Baldwin, In Referees We Trust?, Physics Today, vol.70, issue.2, pp.44-49, 2017.

M. Baldwin, Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of 'Peer Review' in the Cold War United States, Isis, vol.109, issue.3, pp.538-58, 2018.

V. Batagelj, A. Ferligoj, and F. Squazzoni, The Emergence of a Field: A Network Analysis of Research on Peer Review, Scientometrics, vol.115, issue.1, pp.503-535, 2017.

A. Baverstock, R. Blackburn, and M. Iskandarova, Who Are the Independent Editors, How Did They Reach Their Role and What Are Their Associated Job Satisfactions?, Learned Publishing, vol.28, issue.1, pp.43-53, 2015.

F. Bianchi, F. Grimaldo, G. Bravo, and F. Squazzoni, The Peer Review Game: An Agent-based Model of Scientists Facing Resource Constraints and Institutional Pressures, Scientometrics, vol.113, issue.1, pp.1-20, 2018.

G. Bilder, J. Lin, and C. Neylon, Principles for Open Scholarly Infrastructures, Science in the Open. Accessed, 2015.

L. Bornmann and R. Mutz, Growth Rates of Modern Science: A Bibliometric Analysis Based on the Number of Publications and Cited References, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol.66, issue.11, pp.2215-2237, 2015.

W. Broad and N. Wade, Betrayers of the Truth. Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science, 1982.

R. S. Broadhead and R. C. Rist, Gatekeepers and the Social Control of Social Research, Social Problems, vol.23, issue.3, pp.325-361, 1976.

D. S. Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, 1972.

I. Clarke, The Gatekeepers of Modern Physics: Periodicals and Peer Review in 1920s Britain, Isis, vol.106, issue.1, pp.70-93, 2015.

I. Clarke and J. Mussell, Conservative Attitudes to Old-established Organs: Oliver Lodge and Philosophical Magazine, Notes and Records of the Royal Society, vol.69, issue.3, pp.321-357, 2015.

A. Cohen, S. Pattanaik, P. Kumar, R. R. Bies, A. Boer et al., Organised Crime against the Academic Peer Review System, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, vol.81, issue.6, pp.1012-1029, 2016.

D. Crane, The Gatekeepers of Science: Some Factors Affecting the Selection of Articles for Scientific Journals, The American Sociologist, vol.2, pp.195-201, 1967.

A. Csiszar, Peer Review: Troubled from the Start, Nature, vol.532, issue.7599, pp.306-314, 2016.

A. Csiszar, The Scientific Journal: Authorship and the Politics of Knowledge in the Nineteenth Century, 2018.

M. A. Edwards and S. Roy, Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition, Environmental Engineering Science, vol.34, issue.1, pp.51-61, 2016.

D. Fanelli and V. Larivière, Researchers' Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century, PLoS One, vol.11, issue.3, p.149504, 2016.

K. Fitzpatrick, Peer-to-peer Peer Review and the Future of Scholarly Authority, Social Epistemology. A Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Policy, vol.24, issue.3, pp.161-79, 2010.

M. Fochler, Variants of Epistemic Capitalism. Knowledge Production and the Accumulation of Worth in Commercial Biotechnology and the Academic Life Sciences, Technology, & Human Values, vol.41, issue.5, pp.922-970, 2016.

C. W. Fox, Y. K. Albert, and T. H. Vines, Recruitment of Reviewers Is Becoming Harder at Some Journals: A Test of the Influence of Reviewer Fatigue at Six Journals in Ecology and Evolution, Research Integrity and Peer Review, vol.2, issue.1, p.3, 2017.

R. Frodeman and A. Briggle, The Dedisciplining of Peer Review, Minerva, vol.50, pp.3-19, 2012.

A. Fyfe, Journals, Learned Societies and Money: Philosophical Transactions, ca. 1750-1900, Notes and Records of the Royal Society, vol.69, issue.3, pp.277-99, 2015.

A. Fyfe, 1936: LNG Filon on the Importance of Journal Reputation, The History of the Scientific Journal. Accessed November, vol.6, 2018.

A. Fyfe, Then and Now-Exploring Diversity in Peer Review at the Royal Society, The Royal Society Publishing Blog. Accessed, 2018.

A. Fyfe and . Forthcoming, The Royal Society and the Free Circulation of Knowledge, Old Traditions and New Technologies: The Pasts, Presents, and Futures of Open Scholarly Communications

A. Fyfe, K. Coate, S. Curry, S. Lawson, N. Moxham et al., Untangling Academic Publishing: A History of the Relationship between Commercial Interests, Academic Prestige and the Circulation of Research, 2017.

A. Fyfe, J. Mcdougall-waters, and N. Moxham, 350 Years of Scientific Periodicals, Notes and Records of the Royal Society, vol.69, issue.3, pp.227-266, 2015.

A. Fyfe and C. M. Røstvik, How Female Fellows Fared at the Royal Society, Nature, vol.555, issue.7695, pp.159-61, 2018.

F. Grimaldo, A. Maru?i?, and F. Squazzoni, Fragments of Peer Review. A Quantitative Analysis of the Literature (1969-2015), PLoS One, vol.13, issue.2, p.193148, 2018.

L. Hargens, Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates, American Sociological Review, vol.53, issue.1, pp.139-51, 1988.

S. Harnad, The Postgutenberg Galaxy: How to Get There from Here, The Information Society, vol.11, issue.4, pp.285-91, 1995.

S. Hirschauer, Editorial Judgments: A Praxeology of 'Voting' in Peer Review, Social Studies of Science, vol.40, issue.1, pp.71-103, 2010.

S. Horbach and W. Halffman, The Changing Forms and Expectations of Peer Review, Research Integrity and Peer Review, vol.3, issue.8, pp.1-15, 2018.

M. Jubb, Peer Review: The Current Landscape and Future Trends, Learned Publishing, vol.29, issue.1, pp.13-21, 2016.

S. Kean, PNAS Nixes Special Privileges for (Most) Papers, Science, vol.325, issue.5947, pp.1486-87, 2009.

M. Kovanis, R. Porcher, P. Ravaud, and L. Trinquart, The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise, PLoS One, vol.11, issue.11, p.166387, 2016.

M. Kovanis, L. Trinquart, P. Ravaud, and P. Porcher, Evaluating Alternative Systems of Peer Review: A Large-scale Agent-based Modelling Approach to Scientific Publication, Scientometrics, vol.113, issue.1, pp.651-71, 2017.

M. Lamont, How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment, 2009.

C. J. Lee, C. R. Sugimoto, G. Zhang, and B. Cronin, Bias in Peer Review, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol.64, issue.1, pp.2-17, 2013.

S. Macdonald and J. Kam, Ring a Ring O'roses: Quality Journals and Gamesmanship in Management Studies, Journal of Management Studies, vol.44, issue.4, pp.640-55, 2007.

N. Moxham and A. Fyfe, The Royal Society and the Prehistory of Peer Review, 1665-1965, Historical Journal, vol.61, issue.4, pp.863-89, 2018.

A. Mulligan, L. Hall, and E. Raphael, Peer Review in a Changing World: An International Study Measuring the Attitudes of Researchers, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol.64, issue.1, pp.132-61, 2013.

G. Myers, Texts as Knowledge Claims: The Social Construction of Two Biology Articles, Social Studies of Science, vol.15, issue.4, pp.593-630, 1985.

B. Newman, Authorising Geographical Knowledge: The Development of Peer Review in The Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, 1830-c.1880, Journal of Historical Geography, vol.64, pp.85-97, 2019.

D. Pontille and D. Torny, The Blind Shall See! The Question of Anonymity in Journal Peer Review, Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, vol.4, pp.1-15, 2014.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00981277

D. Pontille and D. Torny, From Manuscript Evaluation to Article Valuation: The Changing Technologies of Journal Peer Review, Human Studies, vol.38, issue.1, pp.57-79, 2015.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01143310

J. Potts, J. Hartley, L. Montgomery, C. Neylon, and E. Rennie, A Journal Is a Club: A New Economic Model for Scholarly Publishing, Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, vol.35, issue.1, pp.27-41, 2017.

. Publons, Global State of Peer Review, Clarivate Analytics, 2018.

C. M. Røstvik, I Am Seriously Tempted to Burn Some of the Papers Which Reach Me for an Opinion, Workload Survival Guide, Times Higher Education, 2016.

C. M. Røstvik and A. Fyfe, Ladies, Gentlemen, and Scientific Publication at the Royal Society, 1945-1990, Open Library of Humanities, vol.4, issue.1, p.37, 2018.

S. Shapin, The Scientific Life: A Moral History of a Late Modern Vocation, 2008.

L. Sigelman and M. L. Whicker, Some Implications of Bias in Peer Review: A Simulation-based Analysis, Social Science Quarterly, vol.68, issue.3, pp.494-509, 1987.

K. Siler and D. Strang, Peer Review and Scholarly Originality. Let, vol.1, p.0, 2017.

F. Bloom, But Don't Step on Any, Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol.42, issue.1, pp.29-61

R. Smith, Classical Peer Review: An Empty Gun, Breast Cancer Research, vol.12, issue.4, p.13, 2010.

F. Squazzoni, G. Bravo, and K. Takács, Does Incentive Provision Increase the Quality of Peer Review? An Experimental Study, Research Policy, vol.42, issue.1, pp.287-94, 2013.

F. Squazzoni, A. Maru?i?, and F. Grimaldo, Publishing: Journals Could Share Peer Review Data, Nature, vol.546, issue.7658, p.352, 2017.

D. Strang and K. Siler, Revising as Reframing: Original Submissions versus Published Papers in Administrative Science Quarterly, Sociological Theory, vol.33, issue.1, pp.71-96, 2005.

D. L. Teele and K. Thelen, Gender in the Journals: Publication Patterns in Political Science, Political Science & Politics, vol.50, issue.2, pp.433-480, 2017.

J. Tennant, J. M. Dugan, D. Graziotin, D. C. Jacques, F. Waldner et al., A Multi-disciplinary Perspective on Emergent and Future Innovations in Peer Review, F1000Research, vol.6, p.1151, 2017.

G. D. Travis and H. M. Collins, New Light on Old Boys: Cognitive and Institutional Particularism in the Peer Review System, Technology, & Human Values, vol.16, issue.3, pp.322-363, 1991.

M. Ware and M. Mabe, The STM Report: An Overview of Scientific and Scholarly Journal Publishing, 2015.

V. Warne, Rewarding Reviewers-Sense or Sensibility? A Wiley Study Explained, Learned Publishing, vol.29, issue.1, pp.41-50, 2016.

M. A. Zaharie and M. Seeber, Are Non-monetary Rewards Effective in Attracting Peer Reviewers? A Natural Experiment, Scientometrics, vol.117, issue.3, pp.1587-609, 2018.

H. Zuckerman and R. Merton, Patterns of Evaluation in Science: Institutionalisation, Structure and Functions of the Referee System, Minerva, vol.9, issue.1, pp.66-100, 1971.