Abstract
It was Habermas who commented on the fact that knowledge is never interest free. But it often appears to be on the surface. Journals with their rigorous systems of double blind peer review certainly do their best to avoid partiality and add to the trustworthiness of the process. But their deeply routinised systems contribute to the " black boxing" of knowledge production. This article wishes to examine aspects of interests in knowledge. It does this by three routes of analysis. First it presents data on journal structures and process. Second it finds patterns and trends in knowledge development. Third it critically reflects on the nature of new knowledges produced. In doing so it seeks to make the workings of the black box of Annals more transparent.