During reviewing the articles some journals perfer the blind peer review that as author I will Know who will review my article, on the other hand some journals will not gives the names of the reviwers, so which is best to get the right and fair descion on your work
Hi, this may be interesting for you: there is a nice overview listing the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of peer review on the publisher site from Wiley... https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/what-is-peer-review/types-of-peer-review.html
This may be quite helpful in answering your question I think.
Best Regards!
I think blind peer review is better because this type of review allows hiding the reviewer identity. In addition, it allows the reviewer to know the author's previous works, which facilitates the revision of the manuscript.
thanks all for contribution but even in double blind peer review the reviewer can predicate the author or authors and this can give him bias to accept or reject the work
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Journalism