Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2026

Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
Published on: February 16, 2011
Beyond the consulting room: intuition and intersubjectivity in journal peer review
1Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. wendylipworth@gmail.com
Objective:
The manuscript review process is a central part of medicine, but has become increasingly the subject of criticism. A frequent claim is that the process is insufficiently objective and that it is inconsistent in its capacity to assess manuscript quality. Implicit in this is the expectation that manuscript review is, or should be, a 'scientific' process. In this paper I examine and critique this 'scientific imperative'.
Conclusions:
Manuscript review, like clinical medicine and (ironically) like science itself, is not and cannot be a 'scientific' process, and this needs to be taken into account both by those carrying out reviews and those who wish to evaluate and improve the manuscript review process.
Related Concept Videos
Feedback Inhibition
Ethics in Research
The Sense of Self: Reflected Self-Appraisal and Social Comparison
Reason and Intuition
Interpersonal Psychotherapy
Introspection

