Double-blind peer review

Also available in: Arabic | German | Turkish
 

Definition: Evaluation of research products by qualified experts where both the author(s) and reviewer(s) are anonymous to each other. “This approach conceals the identity of the authors and their affiliations from reviewers and would, in theory, remove biases of professional reputation, gender, race, and institutional affiliation, allowing the reviewer to avoid bias and to focus on the manuscript’s merit alone.” (Tvina et al., 2019, 1082). Like all types of peer-review, double-blind peer review is not without flaws. Anonymity can be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve for certain researchers working in a niche area.

Related terms: Ad hominem bias, Affiliation bias, Anonymous review, Masked review, Open peer review, Peer review, Single-blind peer review, Traditional peer review, Triple-Blind peer review

References:

  • Largent, E. A., & Snodgrass, R. T. (2016). Blind peer review by academic journals. In C. T. Robertson & A. S. Kesselheim (Eds.), Blinding as a solution to bias: Strengthening biomedical science, forensic science, and law (pp. 75–95). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802460-7.00005-X
  • Tvina, A., Spellecy, R., & Palatnik, A. (2019). Bias in the peer review process: can we do better? Obstetrics & Gynecology, 133(6), 1081–1083. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003260

Originally drafted by: Mahmoud Elsherif

Reviewed by: Bradley Baker, Helena Hartmann, Meng Liu, Emma Norris