Possible Duplicate:
Are the referees of a journal allowed to reveal the title of the papers they review after the review process?

Suppose you were a single-blind paper reviewer (i.e. you could see the author's name, but they couldn't see your name) and you didn't obviously de-anonymize yourself during the review. If the paper gets accepted and published, and you are writing a review/summary of it (in its published form, not in any pre-publication form you have seen) on your blog after it appears in print.

  1. Can you mention the fact that you were a reviewer for this paper?

  2. Can you make comments about pre-publication versions of the paper? For instance: 'when submitted the paper lacked X, but other reviewers and I suggested it to be added and after revisions the author provided a full proof of X'.

  • Why would you want to do 1? – StrongBad Oct 9 '12 at 13:50
  • @DanielE.Shub mostly to make the blog post more personal and convey the people side of research. I usually like to say how I came across a paper and usually it is through an author I follow or forward/backward-citations of things I've read. In this case however, I would never (or at least not so soon) have come across this paper if I was not a reviewer for it. Thanks for that second link! I knew I have seen something similar around, but couldn't find it. – Artem Kaznatcheev Oct 9 '12 at 13:53
  • Why don't you ask "that" (how to convey the people side of research). – StrongBad Oct 9 '12 at 13:57
  • @DanielE.Shub I don't know how to formulate that question in any non-vague way. Also, you guys are fast to spot and close dupes, I was hoping to vote to close my own question :D. Thanks for the fast response. – Artem Kaznatcheev Oct 9 '12 at 14:03
  • I'd say it strongly depends on the policy of a particular journal the paper is reviewed for, so you'd better check the guidelines for reviewers. If I recall correctly, there is at least one journal having the policy that the reviewer can disclose her/his identity to the author only if the paper was eventually published in the journal in question and only after the publication has actually taken place. – just-learning Feb 18 '14 at 22:25

I'd just pretend that you stumbled across a paper, rather than say you reviewed it on your blog.

And you should not make comments about the pre-published version of the paper. This could be embarrassing for the author, and seriously violates the trust embodied in the reviewing process.

| improve this answer | |

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