How NASA is redesigning the science of peer review

Space · Published 25 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: To ensure the most rigorous and unbiased science, NASA is shifting how it evaluates research proposals. By moving toward a dual-anonymous system, the agency aims to strip away the influence of prestige and reputation, focusing purely on the merit of the ideas being submitted.

On March 3, 2020, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) hosted a virtual town hall to introduce the implementation of dual-anonymous peer review. This process is designed to minimize bias during the proposal evaluation phase. In a dual-anonymous system, both the researchers submitting the proposal and the experts reviewing it remain anonymous to one another. This prevents reviewers from being influenced by a laboratory's size, a researcher's previous accolades, or institutional affiliations. This initiative specifically addresses the motivations for moving away from traditional review structures. It seeks to eliminate hidden biases that might favor established names over novel concepts.

The transition involves specific logistical shifts for the scientific community. NASA provided guidance on how to prepare anonymized proposals and detailed the mechanics of the review process itself. The goal is to create a level playing field where the quality of the science is the primary metric for success. This shift is part of a broader effort to modernize how NASA manages its science missions and competition models, including the rollout of Competition Model 2.0 (CM 2.0). The agency also scheduled specific sessions for the A.32 ICESat2 project to discuss these changes. These meetings occurred on June 15 and September 12 to help the community adapt.

Transparency and community engagement are central to these changes. NASA has utilized virtual town halls and webinars to gather feedback from academia, the media, and the public. These forums allow the community to vote on questions and participate in the dialogue regarding how new policies, such as those affecting astromaterials curation and sample allocation, impact the scientific return of space exploration. The Chief Scientist for Astromaterials Curation also hosts webinars to discuss the bi-annual Astromaterials Newsletter. This publication serves as the primary way to announce new sample opportunities to the scientific community.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• How NASA is anonymizing the search for distant worlds
• Is peer review a gold standard for truth or a flawed, biased gatekeeping mechanism?
• How a century-old scientific institution balances elite prestige with the rigors of modern peer review
• Is peer review the gold standard of science or a flawed, slow gatekeeper?
• Post-publication peer review may help strengthen the validity of scientific literature
• From Space Dogs to the Electric Atmosphere
• Why global sea levels are rising and what satellites reveal about our changing planet
• Arctic sea ice is reaching record lows, but recent years show a surprising plateau.
• Can we mine water on the Moon and Mars to sustain human life?
• Hidden beneath the waves, massive internal tides shape our ocean's mysterious, invisible movements.
• How do modern explorers prepare for the extreme challenge of finding life beyond Earth?
• NASA selects four astronauts to pioneer a new era of commercial spaceflight

More in Space agencies · More in Space · Latest · A–Z · All topics