Dear colleague,
It well known that for the majority of researchers, the reviewers of their manuscripts are anonymous. Also, most papers are reviewed by one referee. As in the case of some revues. I think that is more benefit if the identity of the authors is hidden in the process of review.
Once you've submitted your paper to a journal, how important is it that the reviewers don't know who wrote it?
Do you suggest the anonymity (of both authors and reviewers) in the procedure of peer-review to improve any contribution?
Do you think that the papers submitted for double-blind review are in more impartial assessment?
Thank a lot to share your opinion.
Hello Mohammed Benharrat
I agree that the process is double-blind. As a reviewer, I still DO NOT want people to know that I was a reviewer (most of the journals I have been involved with have 2 or 3 reviewers) even AFTER the article is published. There is a new fashion with some journals to publish the names of the reviewers with the article. I would like to avoid that and as a result, I do not review for those journals. Has anybody else had this experience and worry?
See also these releated discussions:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-blind-peer-review-better-than-open-peer-review
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Which-i-more-suitable-for-scientfic-journals-blind-peer-review-or-open-peer-review-or-combination-between-the-two
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_is_peer_review_blind
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_blind_peer-review_honest_Does_it_help_or_disfavor_achieving_an_objective_review_of_journal_papers
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Open_peer-review_is_full_transparency_possible
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science and Engineering
- Artificial Intelligence