larly to “courageous risk-takers” and to “lazy conformists”—contra-
dict the literature on peer review, which frames extra-intellectual
consideration as corrupting the evaluation process.^36 Again, this lit-
erature ignores the extent to which self-concept shapes the way pan-
elists appreciate and evaluate the work of others. Among the panel-
ists, an English professor notes this influence, remarking that “the
older I get, I’ve realized more and more how my own intellectual
preoccupations really do spring from concerns that I just meet in my
everyday life, and the kind of everyday major decisions I’ve had to
make in the course of my own personal life and in my career.” As we
have seen in previous chapters (especially Chapter 4), scholarship is
far from being an abstract and disconnected pursuit; instead, it is
intimately tied to the image that academics hold of themselves (in-
cluding their relative status), and to how they think they should lead
their lives.
Table 5.7 shows that 41 percent of panelists refer to applicants’
moral qualities when assessing proposals—enough to support the
conclusion that doing so is not exceptional, but part of the normal
order of things. Panelists privilege determination and hard work, hu-
mility, authenticity, and audacity. They express how the management
of the self—the display of a proper scholarly and moral habitus—is
crucial to definitions of excellence across fields. These qualities sug-
gest that at least some panelists select not only scholars, but also
human beings whom they deem worthy of admiration for moral
reasons. Thus a political scientist says he recognizes excellence “first
of all, by the willingness of someone to stick their neck out seriously
to propose to produce disconfirmable knowledge”; and a historian
praises “the person who is in control of their own intellectual work,
who sort of has made their own choices, who has reasons for doing
everything they’re doing. That to me always stands out and it al-
ways distinguishes the very best people.” Some of the specific moral
qualities most frequently mentioned by panelists are discussed below
(and shown in Table 5.7).
Recognizing Various Kinds of Excellence / 195