A comical referee’s report from the Economic History Review illustrates some of the problems with peer review.
My paper on Argentina’s industrial output during 1870s-1913 was just rejected for publication in the Economic History Review. Two of the referees were mildly supportive, although they made many constructive criticisms that will greatly improve the paper. The editor’s decision, however, appears to have been largely based on the third referee’s 5,000-word diatribe, which I have reproduced below, with some of my favourite passages highlighted. Continue reading