Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review
Google (United States) · Tsinghua University
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
- FWCI
- 78.98
- Percentile
- 100%
- References
- 27
Authors
3Topics & keywords
- Prestige
- Double blind
- Single blind
- Peer review
- Cornerstone
- Computer science
- Psychology
- Information retrieval