Donna YatesNov 24, 2022

Pre-prints in social science: does anyone have any experience with how journals feel about this? Your own thoughts?

I've got a complete paper that is hot right now, basically today, and it maybe can't wait for journal publication. One issue I can see is that it kills double blind peer review, but everyone on earth would know it is me writing this so that's gone anyway.

@academicchatter #academia

Show threadAaron KingNov 24, 2022
@Drdonnayates @academicchatter to a person not into that stuff but into tech, the blindness of the peer review depends a lot more on the reviewer not snooping online. If you’re into a topic you probably know all the writers and can guess from style or just Google paragraphs to find the author.
Show threadDonna YatesNov 24, 2022
@trendoid @academicchatter Oh I think blind peer review is a farce. I always know who I am reviewing, and anyone who can't tell a paper is mine shouldn't be reviewing it! It's more the issue that journals seem to like to keep up the facade or peer review being double blind.
Show threadMatt Berkley

@Drdonnayates @trendoid @academicchatter

If someone begins writing about a topic which few people have published on, might a reviewer be too lenient/scrutinise less, wrongly believing that they know who the author is (or believing that they know the author is one of a few who are established)?

Nov 24, 2022 at 1:17pmWeb
Show threadDonna YatesNov 24, 2022
@MattBerkley @trendoid @academicchatter I'm not sure I follow. In what circumstance?
Show threadMatt BerkleyNov 24, 2022

@Drdonnayates @trendoid @academicchatter

If reviewers guess who's written the paper, they might guess wrong, and give a more "biased" review than they would have if the review process hadn't been blind.

Show threadMatt BerkleyNov 24, 2022

@Drdonnayates @trendoid @academicchatter

The biases which the process is designed to avoid - from "blind" faith in authors' reputations for quality work and so on - might be even more inappropriate (ie lead to worse decisions) where the reviewer wrongly believes/suspects that the author is a particular person or belongs to a known set of possible authors.

Show threadMatt BerkleyNov 24, 2022

@Drdonnayates @trendoid @academicchatter

Maybe in some fields, for each author whose identity a reviewer guesses correctly, there are several others who reviewers think might be an author but who aren't in fact; perhaps these suspicions could influence the result.

Show threadAaron KingNov 24, 2022
@MattBerkley @Drdonnayates @academicchatter that’s true. Guessing wrong is probably as accurate as guessing right.
Show threadDr Suzy J StylesNov 25, 2022

@academicchatter @Drdonnayates @MattBerkley @trendoid

#mystery 😂
Review She Wrote

After four rounds of peer review, #Reviewer3 is found dead at his keyboard. The Editor is missing. The suspects are the article authors, but the journal’s system won’t reveal the their names without the editor’s login.

Can Emeritus Professor JG Fletcher use #Clues in the manuscript to figure out who is responsible before they come after her?

@academicchatter