In order to explore monograph peer review in the Arts and Humanities, this article introduces and discusses an applied example, examining the route to publication of Danielle Fuller and DeNel Rehberg Sedo's Reading Beyond the Book: The Social Practices of Contemporary Literary Culture (2013). The book's co-authors supplemented the traditional "blind" peer review system with a range of practices including the informal, DIY review of colleagues and "clever friends," as well as using the feedback derived from grant applications, journal articles, and book chapters. The article "explodes" the book into a series of documents and non-linear processes to demonstrate the significance of the various forms of feedback to the development of Fuller and Rehberg Sedo's monograph. The analysis reveals substantial differences between book and article peer review processes, including an emphasis on marketing in review forms and the pressures to publish, that the co-authors navigated through the introduction of "clever friends" to the review processes. These findings, drawing on Science and Technology Studies (STS), demonstrate how such a research methodology can identify how knowledge is constructed in the Arts and Humanities, and potential implications for the valuation of research processes and collaborations.

No abstract

Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.When citing, please reference the published version. Take down policyWhile the University of Birmingham exercises care and attention in making items available there are rare occasions when an item has been uploaded in error or has been deemed to be commercially or otherwise sensitive.

4.3 Objective 3: Whenever we develop new services or channels, we will make sure that everyone is able to access and enjoy them..

No abstract