Comments on: Gender bias in peer-review: the final word? http://sarahaskew.net/2009/06/01/gender-bias-in-peer-review-the-final-word/ sarahaskew.net Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:05:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Stephen Serjeant http://sarahaskew.net/2009/06/01/gender-bias-in-peer-review-the-final-word/comment-page-1/#comment-374 Stephen Serjeant Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:16:56 +0000 http://sarahaskew.wordpress.com/?p=916#comment-374 (2nd attempt at posting this - hope it works this time) I raise double-blind peer review every now and then with fellow academics and always get the same response: "You'd be able to tell who it is anyway because it's a small community. Anyway, information on track record and reputation is useful for peer review." I'm not sure what this tells us... But there is clearly some resistance in the community. For my part, I'd like any reforms to be evidence-based and any experiments in astronomy to be motivated by evidence in other disciplines. (2nd attempt at posting this – hope it works this time)

I raise double-blind peer review every now and then with fellow academics and always get the same response: “You’d be able to tell who it is anyway because it’s a small community. Anyway, information on track record and reputation is useful for peer review.”

I’m not sure what this tells us… But there is clearly some resistance in the community. For my part, I’d like any reforms to be evidence-based and any experiments in astronomy to be motivated by evidence in other disciplines.

]]> By: Stephen Serjeant http://sarahaskew.net/2009/06/01/gender-bias-in-peer-review-the-final-word/comment-page-1/#comment-373 Stephen Serjeant Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:12:28 +0000 http://sarahaskew.wordpress.com/?p=916#comment-373 I raise double-blind peer review every now and then with fellow academics and always get the same answer: "You'd be able to guess who it is anyway because it's a small community. Anyway, information on track record and reputation is useful for peer review." I'm not sure what this tells us... But for whatever reason the community is resistant to change. For my own part, I'd want any reforms or innovations to be evidence-based. I raise double-blind peer review every now and then with fellow academics and always get the same answer: “You’d be able to guess who it is anyway because it’s a small community. Anyway, information on track record and reputation is useful for peer review.”

I’m not sure what this tells us… But for whatever reason the community is resistant to change. For my own part, I’d want any reforms or innovations to be evidence-based.

]]> By: Sarah http://sarahaskew.net/2009/06/01/gender-bias-in-peer-review-the-final-word/comment-page-1/#comment-372 Sarah Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:31:24 +0000 http://sarahaskew.wordpress.com/?p=916#comment-372 Maybe in that case we shouldn't call it "double-blind" either. Suggestions? Maybe in that case we shouldn’t call it “double-blind” either. Suggestions?

]]> By: Tom Reding http://sarahaskew.net/2009/06/01/gender-bias-in-peer-review-the-final-word/comment-page-1/#comment-371 Tom Reding Tue, 02 Jun 2009 01:34:03 +0000 http://sarahaskew.wordpress.com/?p=916#comment-371 Double blind ftw. Saying it's 'more closed' or 'more open' is already assigning emotion to the process, which is what should be avoided. All the reviewers need are the title and body. Nothing else should matter. Double blind ftw. Saying it’s ‘more closed’ or ‘more open’ is already assigning emotion to the process, which is what should be avoided. All the reviewers need are the title and body. Nothing else should matter.

]]>