Referees' reports: volume 64, peer reviews of scientific papers submitted to the Royal Society for publication
Reference number: RR/64
Date: 1937
Description
Containing referee's reports arranged alphabetically by the lead author of the paper submitted to the Royal Society for review in 1937.
Notable referees and authors include Arthur Fage, George Ridsdale Goldsbrough and Thomas Henry Havelock.
When report is on a standardised form (D), the questions are:
1. Whether or not the paper should be read before the Society
2. Whether the paper should or should not be published by the Society
3. Whether, in the former case, it should be published in the 'Philosophical Transactions' or 'Proceedings'
4. Whether it should be published in full or only in part or whether any material modifications are necessary
5. Which illustrations, if any, accompanying the paper should be reproduced
General remarks
When report is on a standardised form (E), the questions are:
1. Whether or not the paper should be read before the Society
2. Whether the paper contains contributions to knowledge of sufficient scientific interest for the space required
3. Whether any portions or illustrations of the paper are redundant
4. Whether it should be published by the Society
5. Whether it should be published in 'Philosophical Transactions' or 'Proceedings'
6.Whether it could be published by some other body
7. General remarks
- Reference number
- RR/64
- Earliest possible date
- 1937
- Physical description
- Loose paper in folders
- Page extent
- One box comprising 134 reports
- Format
- Typescript
Manuscript
Use this record
Export this record
Citation
Referees' reports: volume 64, peer reviews of scientific papers submitted to the Royal Society for publication, 1937, RR/64, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_64/referees-reports-volume-64-peer-reviews-of-scientific-papers-submitted-to-the-royal-society-for-publication, accessed on 03 November 2024
Link to this record
https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_64/referees-reports-volume-64-peer-reviews-of-scientific-papers-submitted-to-the-royal-society-for-publication
Embed this record
<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_64/referees-reports-volume-64-peer-reviews-of-scientific-papers-submitted-to-the-royal-society-for-publication" title="Referees' reports: volume 64, peer reviews of scientific papers submitted to the Royal Society for publication" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Hierarchy
This volume contains 134 manuscripts:
-
Referee's report by William Henry Eccles, on a paper 'Propagation of wave-packets incident obliquely upon a stratified doubly refracting ionosphere' by H G Booker
March 1938 Creator: William Henry Eccles Reference number: RR/64/1 -
Referee's report by George Edward Briggs, on a paper 'The effect on the growth of Lemna minor of alternating periods of light and darkness of equal length' by Hugh Dickson
December 1937 Creator: George Edward Briggs Reference number: RR/64/2 -
Referee's report by Francis Hugh Adam Marshall, on a paper 'Molecular structure in relation to oestrogenic activity. Compounds without a phenanthrene nucleus' by Edward Charles Dodds and W Lawson
January 1938 Creator: Francis Hugh Adam Marshall Reference number: RR/64/3 -
Referee's report by Harold King, on a paper 'Molecular structure in relation to oestrogenic activity. Compounds without a phenanthrene nucleus' by Edward Charles Dodds and W Lawson
05 January 1938 Creator: Harold King Reference number: RR/64/4
This item is part of:
-
Referees' reports on scientific papers submitted to the Royal Society for publication
1831- Reference number: RR
Explore the collection
-
Referee Reports
Date: 1832-1954
This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.View collection