Here’s a great post about the complexities of open closed and anonymous and identified reviewers. I think I mixed them a bit in my last post as you can mix the process so much.
About a month ago, I attempted to give an overview of a few open review platforms. In relation to that, the question of anonymity of the reviewers came up. I have given it some more thought and would like to discuss some of these thoughts.
First of all, when I talk about open/closed and anonymous/identified review, I would like to point out that I consider these two independent “dimensions” of the nature of scientific peer review:
| Anonymous | Identified | |
| Closed | 1 | 2 |
| Open | 3 | 4 |
So, reviews can either be closed or open and at the same time, anonymous or identified.
Traditional journals have, to the best of my knowledge, more or less all been in the first “quadrant” above, i.e. both closed in the sense that they are not available to the readers of the journal after publication; and anonymous in the sense that the authors cannot see who the…
View original post 382 more words
The Online Academic 