Braun Tibor, Schubert András (szerk.): Szakértői bírálat (peer review) a tudományos kutatásban : Válogatott tanulmányok a téma szakirodalmából (A MTAK Informatikai És Tudományelemzési Sorozata 7., 1993)

IAN I. MITROFF and DARYL E. CHUBIN: Peer Review at the NSF: A Dialectical Policy Analysis

134 MITROFF & CHUBIN: PEER REVIEW AT THE NSF 6. In general, referees and advisors are older, more eminent and published, and located at more prestigious institutions than the 'average' member of the scientific community. Sec N. C. Mullins, 'The Structure of an Elite: The Advisory Structure of the Public Health Service', Science Studies, Vol. 2 (1972), 3-29; L. Groeneveld, N. Koiier and N. Mullins, 'The Advisers of the US National Science Foundation', Social Studies of Science, Vol. 5 (August 1975), 343-54; M. J. Mulkay, 'The Mediating Role of the Scientific Elite', Social Studies of Science, Vol. 6 (1976), 445-70. 7. Studies of NIH peer review include G. M. Carter, 'Peer Review, Citations, and Biomedical Research Policy: NIH Grants to Medical School Faculty' (Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand Corporation Report R-1583-HEW, 1974); C. Henley, 'Peer Review of Research Grant Applications at the National Institutes of Health', Federation Proceedings, Vol. 36 (July 1977), 2066-68, 2186-90, 2335-38; NIH Grants Peer Review Study Team, 'Grants Peer Review: Report to the Director, NIH, Phase I, Vols. I-IIF (Bethesda, Md.: National Institutes of Health, December 1976). 8. A provocative formation of this relationship can be found in J.-J. Salomon, 'The Mating of Knowledge and Power', Impact of Science on Society, Vol. 22 (January-June 1972), 123-32. 9. By 'dialectic' we mean more than a mere polar opposition or conflict between viewpoints. We mean that viewpoints are intensely opposed to one another, though the meaning of one is dependent on the other; that is, either viewpoint is completely self-contained but is defined, if only in part, through the other. Be this as it may, we are more interested at present in the operational use of the dialectic as a unique methodology for analyzing issues, rather than in quibbling about the various historical meanings of the term. 10. C. West Churchman, The Design of Inquiring Systems (New York: Basic Books, 1971); P. Feyerabend, Against Method (London: New Left Books, 1976); G. Holton, Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973); A. Kantrowitz et al., 'The Science Court Experiment, an Interim Report', Science, Vol. 193 (20 August 1976), 653-56; M. Levine, 'Scientific Method and the Adversary Model: Some Preliminary Thoughts', American Psychologist, Vol. 29 (September 1974), 661-77; R. O. Mason, 'A Dialectical Approach to Strategic Plarfning', Management Science, Vol. 15 (1969), B-403-14; R. K. Merton, Sociological Ambivalence (New York: The Free Press, 1976); D. Nelkin, 'Thoughts on the Proposed Science Court', Newsletter on Science, Technology, and Human Values, No. 18 (1977), 20-31. 11. Churchman, Feyerabend and Mason, ops. cit. note 10. 12. ^lason, op. cit. note 10. 13. 'National Science Foundation Peer Review, Volume I', A Report of the Subcommittee on Science, Research and Technology of the Committee on Science and Technology, US House of Representatives, Ninety-Fourth Congress, Second Session (January 1976). 14. For example, Gustafson, op. cit. note 1. 15. Verbatim quotes have been purposefully included in Table 1 to indicate the depth and sincerity with which the respective parties hold their views. In all cases, the assumptions are direct or abridged quotes excerpted from the document cited in note 13. 16. Churchman and Mason, ops. cit. note 10.