I wrote a paper to a journal, which is still under review. Now I need to cite it in another paper that is double-blinded. Is this a problem?


Typically, there are two ways to cite yourself in a double-blind paper:

  1. Cite the paper as though it were written by somebody else
  2. Blank the information in the citation (e.g., "Blinded paper currently in review")

You should use the first whenever possible, since it is more informative and allows the reviewer to consult the reference. The second case is used when it cannot apply and maintain blinding, like citing the conference version of a paper in an extended version for a journal. Your case is another good example: the paper is under review and so cannot be read by the reviewers in any case, so blanking the citation is fine. The article formatting guidelines may even give you a specific preferred method for doing so.


When it comes to double-blind review, it's up to everyone in the process to respect the blinding. Internet searches and unblind an article very quickly, so everyone who reviews blinded articles knows their not supposed to do it. As long as you follow the blinding instructions, it should be OK.

  • But since my preprint is not available on internet the revisors can think that I am the author of both? – Thaís Bardini Idalino Oct 30 '14 at 12:23
  • I see, I had this the wrong way around. In this case, I would recommend talking to the editor of the blinded article. My suggestion would be to cite the other paper as in review and take the names off of the citation as well. – Bill Barth Oct 30 '14 at 12:31
  • 1
    I am not in a double-blind field, but this strikes me as peculiar. As a reviewer, I think that one of my tasks should be performing a literature search and finding if the contribution is genuinely novel. – Federico Poloni Oct 30 '14 at 13:02
  • @FedericoPoloni, you should go read the literature on double-blind reviewing (start here, maybe). I only occasionally have to do it, and it's tedious. However, there are fields where the bias towards young authors, female authors, and other types of non-entrenched authors was so high, that something needed to be done. Also, there's no prohibition on checking citations and literature, just on intentional discovery of the authors of the article. It's a fine line, but making folks aware of their duty to be impartial is the goal. – Bill Barth Oct 30 '14 at 13:34
  • It can fire both ways. We got a paper rejected because our blinding was so thorough that the reviewers thought (in the blinded paper) we were some random people repeating work done by us in one of our own cited papers. Of course, it wasn't, and had lots of new stuff but the reviewers thought we were fellow travellers, jumping on the bandwagon of our earlier work and rejected the paper. Strange situation. – Captain Emacs Nov 16 '16 at 5:35

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.