This study explores the real-time experiences of peer reviewers evaluating grant applications in medical humanities and social sciences. Using the think-aloud approach and Critical Decision Method, 16 reviewers were interviewed while reviewing applications. The analysis revealed five dilemmas: accepting review invitations, relying solely on application information, considering institutional prestige, offering comments outside expertise, and balancing risk-taking with caution. Reviewers' interpretations of 'right' actions were idiosyncratic, influenced by values, preferences, and norms, leading to varied outcomes. The study highlights the thoughtful considerations involved in peer review and cautions against attributing consensus absence to bias, instead emphasizing the diversity reviewers bring to the process.
Publisher
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Published On
Mar 04, 2022
Authors
Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau, Ana Wheelock, Tushna Vandrevala, Priscilla Harries
Tags
peer review
grant applications
medical humanities
social sciences
decision-making
dilemmas
Related Publications
Explore these studies to deepen your understanding of the subject.
