3

The journal that I have chosen for submitting my paper doesn't use double-blind review (double blind review means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process).

Can I ask editors via email, or make a request for one? Is it difficult for them to organise the editing of the paper afterwards if it is approved or it is appropriate to do that?

  • 3
    Why? And how will this happen, now that you have already send the paper without anonymizing it? – Alexandros Jan 16 '16 at 11:58
  • 1
    This is not really a question rather a matter of a certain journal's review/publishing policy. – OK- Jan 16 '16 at 15:40
  • @Alexandros did you understand my question ? – SSimon Jan 17 '16 at 4:33
  • "The journal that I have chosen for submitting my paper", " Is it difficult for them to organise the editing of the paper afterwards". It is as though you have already submitted your paper. If you have not submitted the paper, then why "should they organize the editing of the paper afterwards"? BTW you should not be rude to people trying to help you. – Alexandros Jan 17 '16 at 8:33
  • 1
    The question doesn't reflect that distinction as easily as you think. I also understood that you had already submitted the article. And, following my comments on other answers, I'm left wondering what possible reason someone would have for requesting double blind reviews of a "single blind" journal... – Fábio Dias Jan 20 '16 at 14:40
13

With the submission management systems of most journals, it will be an incredibly obnoxious hassle for the editors to support a double-blind review if the journal's policy is normally single-blind review.

The reason is that, even if you remove names from the manuscript, most review systems present the reviewers with all of the key meta-data about the paper, including the author identities. This information is tied to author accounts in the system, the paper production and publication process for accepted papers, and possibly also external systems such as ORCID. This is configured right into the software, so the only method most editors would have for supporting double-blind would be to have the authors create pseudonymous accounts and then later work with the production staff to manually intervene and change all of the metadata (likely screwing up their records as well) before the paper actually appeared. Thus, given the degree of hassle and problems involved, I would expect most editors to refuse without some sort of exceedingly unusual extenuating circumstance.

You can always ask politely, of course, but you should expect the answer to be no.

  • For the double blind review, you need to provide the printed version of the manuscript without the author names and institution, replacing them by the long randomly selected number. That's it. Do not limit your brains along the lines of the feature incomplete software. Downvoting. – h22 Jan 20 '16 at 7:27
  • @h22 That simply will not work for any single-blind journal that I have ever dealt with: the manuscript would be anonymous, but the reviewer would still be told who the authors are on the online reviewing form---unless, as noted, the editor abuses the manuscript handling system and makes a big hassle for everybody. – jakebeal Jan 20 '16 at 11:52
  • Will the editor call the police, will the helicopters with gunners rush to the tracked place from where you are making a mobile phone call asking for this type of review? Where is exactly the danger? – h22 Jan 20 '16 at 12:36
  • 2
    Not following the journal guidelines for submission is one of the easier ways of getting an article quickly rejected... – Fábio Dias Jan 20 '16 at 14:37
  • 2
    @h22 The danger is getting your manuscript desk rejected. – Fomite Jan 20 '16 at 22:29
0

To make unnecessary associations with the manuscript, you can ask for this possibility separately, before submitting the paper itself. You can also do this even anonymously (say making the phone call). They will answer. If no, then no.

I think it would be unethical and unprofessional for the editor to judge about your work negatively in advance just because of asking a quite, polite question about the possible reviewing processes.

Journals that used the double blinded review simply required an additional manuscript version from me, without the author and institution headers.

  • 6
    But you better have a really good reason for asking.... – Fábio Dias Jan 16 '16 at 15:28
  • Please clarify. – h22 Jan 20 '16 at 7:20
  • 2
    My opinion is similar to @jakebeal 's answer (which I read after writing this). I think it is pretty weird to ask this of a journal. Most likely, by accepting such request, the editor would 'break' the usual processing chain of articles (for instance, most of the web systems show the name of the authors). I'm not saying it can't be done, but you really should have a good reason for asking for such potentially disruptive change.... And, tbh, I can't think of one atm... – Fábio Dias Jan 20 '16 at 14:34
  • 3
    I don't think "If you're going to make my day harder, you should have a decent justification for doing so" is something that needs much clarification. – Fomite Jan 20 '16 at 22:30

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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