The Peer Review Transition: Editorial Responses to the Formalization of Quality Cultures in Humanities Journals

Abstract This study examines the transition from unsystematic, locally grounded quality assurance practices to formal external peer review in Swedish humanities journals. This process began in the mid-1990s and accelerated in the early 2000s due to changing demands from the primary funding agency for Swedish humanities journals. Prior to the formalization of quality control mechanisms, Swedish humanities journals relied on informal procedures such as editorial revisions and collegial advice. Around the year 2000, broader shifts in research policy prompted journal editors and boards to consider the formalization of approaches to quality assurance and editorial work, including the model of “double-blind peer review.” Drawing on interviews with former editors, archival documents, and journal content, we describe earlier “proto peer review practices” and trace the drivers of the subsequent shift toward formal external peer review. Rather than replacing earlier practices entirely, this shift created a zone of interaction between local evaluative traditions and global norms. Describing this encounter, this study offers insights into how humanities journals in smaller linguistic regions adapt to systemic changes while preserving distinct scholarly traditions. We argue that the transition to formal peer review in the journals examined was characterized by both pragmatic and strategic adaptation, as well as resilience and compliance .