Timeline for Revealing manuscript referees' identities after review: Why is this a bad idea?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 2018 at 23:18 | comment | added | Oleg Lobachev | Some journals have an "open review" option, which basically is what you are asking about. | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:49 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://academia.stackexchange.com/ with https://academia.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jul 15, 2016 at 19:23 | vote | accept | Mad Jack | ||
| Jul 13, 2016 at 10:17 | comment | added | Captain Emacs | @DavidRicherby Attempts to steal results are, in my experience as editor, quite rare, but not unheard of, and very unpleasant to deal with. In an important result with possible popularity, I can see why authors would worry. It is important that one can trust the editor to do a good job in this matter. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 8:41 | history | edited | ff524 |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 13, 2016 at 8:04 | comment | added | David Richerby | The fear that referees will steal results is almost completely unfounded so guarding against it is a low priority. For example, one could ask why clothing isn't routinely waterproofed so that people don't need to be afraid of being squirted with water-pistols while walking down the street. Sure, you could give reasons about waterproof clothing not being comfortable but the real reason is just that being squirted with water pistols in the street isn't a significant enough risk to be worth doing anything about. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 2:45 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAcademia/status/753057837551616000 | ||
| Jul 13, 2016 at 0:29 | answer | added | Jeromy Anglim | timeline score: 35 | |
| Jul 12, 2016 at 23:46 | comment | added | Mad Jack | Yes, and at the other end of the spectrum, perhaps "big-shot" reviewers wouldn't be so quick to dismiss ideas without giving them a fair and thorough analysis if they knew their identities would be known. @ff524 | |
| Jul 12, 2016 at 23:43 | comment | added | ff524 | One obvious reason is that reviewers might refrain from being completely honest if the authors were going to know their identities. (Imagine a junior researcher having to give an honest but negative review of a paper authored by someone very influential in their field?) | |
| Jul 12, 2016 at 23:35 | history | edited | Mad Jack | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 9 characters in body
|
| Jul 12, 2016 at 23:29 | history | asked | Mad Jack | CC BY-SA 3.0 |