Double blind peer reviews are fairer and more objective, say academics

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 …