Double blind peer reviews are fairer and more objective, say academicsBMJ 2008; 336 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39476.357280.DB (Published 31 January 2008) Cite this as: BMJ 2008;336:241
- Zosia Kmietowicz
A large survey of academics from around the world has found strong support for the double blind system of peer review of research papers, where the reviewers and authors are unaware of each other’s identity.
The survey, which resulted in 3040 responses to a questionnaire sent to more than 40 000 authors and editors (a response rate of 7.7%), found that 71% of respondents rated double blind reviewing as effective. In comparison, 52% rated single blind review, where only …
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial