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.

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