this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
583 points (99.7% liked)
Funny
13467 readers
680 users here now
General rules:
- Be kind.
- All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
- Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
- No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
- Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.
Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In single-blind peer review, it’s just the reviewer. In double-blind, it’s both reviewer and author(s) with different levels of author blinding. Double-blind arguably reduces reviewer bias, but depending on the field and subject matter, once an author is recognizable, double-blinding doesn’t truly mask them.
For you know of any journal/field that does double blind? Genuinely interested.
In my field, there are so few experts we can often know who was the reviewer based on their comments.
I know of several journals, such as this one… ONCOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND TRANSPLANTOLOGY https://www.onmtjournal.org/home/peer-review-policy
I know this because I work for two single-blind peer-review journals, and we’ve received submissions formatted for double-blind review. We don’t bother because, like your field, ours is narrow, but there’s a lot of research, and we can’t publish all of it.