double blind reviewing
Bob Damper
rid at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Wed Dec 18 06:15:52 EST 2002
Some anecdotes from personal experience:
* When I was a young researcher, my first ever submission to IEEE
Transactions was rejected with the following parting shot from one of
the reviewers: ``I have never heard of this author''. It was clear
(given what had gone before) that this was intended to be the clinching
criticism. The paper was finally accepted and published after a lengthy
appeal to the Editor in Chief and comprehensive re-reviewing which delayed
publication beyond even the IEEE Transaction's usual two year span.
* A recent (accepted) submission to a journal elicited the response
from one reviewer that ``... this author has worked with some of the
best people in the field''. Ignoring the fact that this is a form of
damning with faint praise, what does it tell you about this reviewer's
perceptions of the process?
A friend and colleague once offered the opinion ``... the trouble with
peer reviewing is that it's done by PEOPLE, like you and me''.
OK, so these look, de facto, like arguments for double-blind reviewing.
Yet I accept that there are cons as well as pros (as detailed by other
contributers to this debate) and, as an editor and workshop chair,
I have never opted for it.
Bob.
***************************************************************
* R I Damper PhD *
* Reader and Head: *
* Image, Speech and Intelligent Systems (ISIS) *
* Research Group *
* Building 1 *
* Department of Electronics and Computer Science *
* University of Southampton *
* Southampton SO17 1BJ *
* England *
* *
* Tel: +44 (0) 23 8059 4577 (direct) *
* FAX: +44 (0) 23 8059 4498 *
* Email: rid at ecs.soton.ac.uk *
* WWW: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~rid *
* *
***************************************************************
More information about the Connectionists
mailing list