A Fast Literature Search Engine based on top-quality journals, by Dr. Mingze Gao.

  • Topic classification is ongoing.
  • Please kindly let me know [mingze.gao@mq.edu.au] in case of any errors.

The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review.

Resource type
Author/contributor
Title
The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review.
Abstract
The results from a randomized experiment conducted at the American Economic Review on the effects of double-blind versus single-blind peer reviewing on acceptance rates and referee rating indicate that acceptance rates are lower and referees are more critical when the reviewer is unaware of the author's identity. These patterns are not significantly different between female and male authors. Authors at top-ranked universities and at colleges and low-ranked universities are largely unaffected by the different reviewing practices, but the authors at near-top-ranked universities and at nonacademic institutions have lower acceptance rates under double-blind reviewing. Copyright 1991 by American Economic Association.
Publication
American Economic Review
Volume
81
Issue
5
Pages
1041-67
Date
1991-12
Citation
Blank, R. M. (1991). The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review. American Economic Review, 81, 1041–1067.
Link to this record