Re: From a distinguished journal. Triple blind reviews seem effective

Interesting... So who chooses whom the paper is sent to for review?

On Tue, May 14, 2019, 8:04 AM DANIEL P. Tompkins, <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Triple blind should disable the built in bias of all parties, from what I
> understand.  Here's a summary from Wiley
> <
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wiley.com%2Fnetwork%2Fresearchers%2Fbeing-a-peer-reviewer%2Fexploring-the-peer-review-process&amp;data=02%7C01%7CCLASSICS-L%40lsv.uky.edu%7Cf31d8e5e8c2c47163eee08d6d86c0b0f%7C2b30530b69b64457b818481cb53d42ae%7C0%7C0%7C636934355894313010&amp;sdata=MRNSNdiJw1WKFxLEyhTCI1zIIu907RcQV3TMVsXcIk4%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >
> :
>
> Another variation on the theme of closed review is triple blind review
> whereby, not only are authors and reviewers blind to each other’s
> identities but where editors are also blind to the identity of both. This
> is aimed at minimizing bias among editors but does not eliminate the
> possibility of identifying authors by their work or of bias against
> competing work. Again, there is little evidence that it is used commonly
> and it requires journals which can afford the administrative staff and
> processes.
>
> I first learned of it from Daniel Nexon while he edited ISQ and he wrote a
> longer summary of what triple-blind entails.  In our small field, it's a
> way to avoid the trap of an entirely decent editor giving material to
> entirely decent people he or she knows to review: intentional bias need not
> be present to perpetuate bias, if all the ducks are lined up in this way.
>
> Best,
>
> Dan
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:48 AM david meadows <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > What about other marginalized groups?
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2019, 6:04 PM DANIEL P. Tompkins, <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >         Int'l Studies Qrtly (@ISQ_Jrnl)
> > > 5/13/19, 3:31 PM
> > > All of the manuscripts published in ⁦‪@ISQ_Jrnl‬⁩'s first 2 issues were
> > > submitted under triple blind review. 50% of 63/1 are (co)authored by
> > female
> > > authors. We'd love to keep this rate up, but it depends on the number
> of
> > > submissions we get from female authors! #womenalsoknowstuff
> > >
> > > Download the Twitter app
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> >
>