articleProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesNov 14, 2017BRONZE OA

Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review

Google (United States) · Tsinghua University

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

Peer review may be "single-blind," in which reviewers are aware of the names and affiliations of paper authors, or "double-blind," in which this information is hidden. Noting that computer science research often appears first or exclusively in peer-reviewed conferences rather than journals, we study these two reviewing models in the context of the 10th Association for Computing Machinery International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, a highly selective venue (15.6% acceptance rate) in which expert committee members review full-length submissions for acceptance. We present a controlled experiment in which four committee members review each paper. Two of these four reviewers are drawn from a pool of…

Citation impact

602
total citations
FWCI
78.98
Percentile
100%
References
27
Citations per year

Authors

3

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Prestige
  • Double blind
  • Single blind
  • Peer review
  • Cornerstone
  • Computer science
  • Psychology
  • Information retrieval
No related works found for this paper.

Funding