Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

On blinding the Journal assessor.

G Parker

    The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry
    |June 1, 1986
    PubMed
    Summary

    Peer review bias was investigated by comparing blind and non-blind assessors rating journal submissions. Results show that knowing the author

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Changes in white matter microstructure and MRI-derived cerebral blood flow after 1-week of exercise training.

    Scientific reports·2021
    Same author

    Refined diagnostic criteria for the bipolar disorders: phase two of the AREDOC project.

    Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica·2021
    Same author

    Acoustic shock: an update review.

    The Journal of laryngology and otology·2020
    Same author

    Paradigms lost, gained and retained.

    Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica·2020
    Same author

    Differentiating clinical and non-clinical depression: a heuristic study offering a template for extension studies.

    Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica·2019
    Same author

    How to choose an antidepressant medication.

    Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica·2018

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Education
    • Scientific Publishing

    Background:

    • Journal peer review is crucial for scientific integrity.
    • Potential bias in peer review, including author awareness, requires investigation.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To determine if awareness of author identity biases the rating of journal submissions.
    • To assess the impact of author information on peer review outcomes.

    Main Methods:

    • Thirty-two journal submissions were evaluated by paired blind and non-blind assessors.
    • Assessors were tasked with identifying author details, and their ratings were compared.

    Main Results:

    • Assessors could identify authorship details for only a minority of submissions.
    • No significant association was found between assessor awareness of author identity and rating bias.

    Conclusions:

    • Author awareness does not appear to introduce bias in the judging and rating of journal submissions.
    • Current peer review processes may be robust against identity-based bias.

    Related Experiment Videos