SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Peer review: single-blind, double-blind, or all the way-blind? · Study

ArticleShelves

ArticlePeer review: single-blind, double-blind, or all the way-blind?

Tony M. Bazi2019

Article2019

Peer review: single-blind, double-blind, or all the way-blind?

14 citations·0/0 files stored·International Urogynecology Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Publishing and Scholarly Communication Academic Writing and Publishing Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

No abstract was published for this record.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

References

2017Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review 1998Effect on the Quality of Peer Review of Blinding Reviewers and Asking Them to Sign Their Reports 1998Effect of Blinding and Unmasking on the Quality of Peer Review 1998Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality?2006Effect of Blinded Peer Review on Abstract Acceptance 2016Single-blind vs Double-blind Peer Review in the Setting of Author Prestige 2019Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review 1994Multiple blinded reviews of the same two manuscripts. Effects of referee characteristics and publication language

Related works

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

2023Challenges and Controversies in Peer Reviewreview · 8 shared references 2023Double‐blind peer review affects reviewer ratings and editor decisions at an ecology journalarticle · 6 shared references 2017A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer reviewarticle · 6 shared references 2022Double- vs single-blind peer review effect on acceptance rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trialsreview · 6 shared references 2022Responsible Conduct of Researchbook · 5 shared references 2022The impact of double-blind peer review on gender bias in scientific publishing: a systematic reviewreview · 5 shared references

Details

Year2019

Typearticle

Published2019-12-09

VenueInternational Urogynecology Journal

ISSN-L0937-3462

Languageen

Citations14

Files0 public / 0

ShelfPublishing and Scholarly Communication

Identifiers

doi10.1007/s00192-019-04187-2

openalex_workW2994546353

Links

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.