AO: The analysts are also engaged in responding to the growing discourse of “openness” noting that “If “[s]cience’s peer review depends on openness [and] openness prevents science from becoming dogmatic, uncritical and biased” then community peer review extends this ethos to a broader form of openness.” (2)
AO: The analysts use the concepts of “consent” and “refusal” from feminist scholarship to ground the protocol.
AO: The analysts use the concepts of harm and benefit to describe why scientists should use this method: “the method of community peer review is designed to allow communities or researchers to work together to ensure a dissemination proposal that reduces harm and increases benefit for communities” (6).
The first person they explicitly cite in text (on page 9) is Gayatri Spivak (and doing “homework”.
