Double-blind in light of the internet: A note on author anonymity
This paper analyses the credibility of author anonymity that is provided by a double-blind review process. It is argued that authors have strong incentives to disseminate information about their papers before publication. A sample from two economics journals, both using double-blind review processes, provides evidence that author-revealing information of most accepted papers is available on the Internet before the review process is finished. The difficulty and cost of identifying authors of unpublished manuscripts from which author identity has been stripped, were examined in an experiment where subjects were paid according to their identification performance. The vast majority of authors could be identified within 60Â s.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2003.
"Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics,"
Journal of the European Economic Association,
MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1346-1366, December.
- Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2001. "Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics," Discussion Papers in Economics 01/8, Department of Economics, University of Leicester.
- repec:eme:ijsepp:v:31:y:2004:i:3:p:259-274 is not listed on IDEAS
- Holm, Håkan J., 2009. "Double-Blind in Light of Internet – Note on Review Processes," Working Papers 2009:5, Lund University, Department of Economics.
- Carolin Haeussler & Lin Jiang & Jerry Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2009. "Specific and General Information Sharing Among Academic Scientists," NBER Working Papers 15315, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:iepoli:v:23:y:2011:i:1:p:24-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.