Hiding behind the curtain: Anonomyous versus open peer review

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

For more than 50 years peer review has guided the decision-making process of editors regarding the merit of publishing scientific work. Peer reviews can be influenced by knowledge of the authors’ identities as well as anonymity of the referee. The value of the current peer review system apparently offsets areas of dissatisfaction that include: (a) reviewer bias as a result of knowing author identity, (b) unequal valuation of reviewer versus author anonymity, (c) resource expense for authors, reviewers, editors, and journals, and (d) inhibition of free communication. This chapter discusses the merits of hiding reviewer and author identity in the peer review process as well as the increasing importance of post publication review.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Suárez, A. L., Bernhard, J. D., & Dellavalle, R. P. (2012). Hiding behind the curtain: Anonomyous versus open peer review. In Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology (pp. 221–225). Springer-Verlag London Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2191-6_36

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free