34 Comments

Thumb default avatar
Afshin Khayambashi over 2 years ago

As a reviewer, I think a single blind review is the better option. reviewers could check the background of the authors to know what papers they've published before and what the novelty of their job is in compare to previous works.

Thumb mr t
Tuamoru Odii about 1 year ago

Brilliant. I agree with this idea behind single-blind peer review system.

Thumb default avatar
Rosa Prahl over 2 years ago

I would prefer the double blind peer review.

Thumb default avatar
Yu Mao over 2 years ago

I prefer the transparent peer review, which provides us more insights into the key points of the paper

Thumb dsc 0915
Zhenhong Hu about 2 years ago

I would prefer the double blind peer review. In that case, reviewers will give the comments which was just based on the quality of the paper.

Thumb default avatar
Ivan Palomares Carrascosa about 2 years ago

I would ideally think of a hybrid model that combine single and double blind peer review, inviting the reviewer to conduct one or another approach depending on some factors, e.g. whether they have publications or institutions in common, etc. Of course it may sound complex and unrealistic to date, but it may not be too "utopic" in a near future

Thumb default avatar
Zhou Li almost 2 years ago

I prefer the more insightful transparent peer review

Thumb default avatar
Lei Pan almost 2 years ago

double blind  

Thumb default avatar
Sergio Lopez almost 2 years ago

Disclose the identities of the authors and the reviewers DURING the review process. The authors have the right to know who the reviewers are.  

Thumb img 8055
Laura Zhou over 1 year ago

I would prefer the double blind peer review.

Thumb paf pic website aug2012
Paul A. Fowler over 1 year ago

Single blind is least worst option. Problem is reviewers are overloaded and overworked. Journals need to find another way, possibly by strangling predatory journals.

Thumb default avatar
Xiao Fang about 1 year ago

I would prefer the double blind peer review.

Thumb capture
Victor S Garcia Rea about 1 year ago

I would prefer double blind review... Although it is true that a reviewer could, eventually, notice who was the writer of the paper under review. 

Thumb capture
Victor S Garcia Rea about 1 year ago

I would prefer double blind review... Although it is true that a reviewer could, eventually, notice who was the writer of the paper under review. 

Thumb default avatar
Daniel Daniel about 1 year ago

I prefer doubled-blind

Thumb default avatar
Maria Carla Martini 7 months ago

Double-blind

Thumb default avatar
Franziska Eller 7 months ago

Double blind.

Thumb
Sulaiman M. Alfadul 5 months ago

the survey page can not be opened

Thumb default avatar
Mukesh Roy 3 months ago

I would prefer the double blind peer review. 

Thumb default avatar
Pritam Khan 3 months ago

I have worked as both reviewer and ofcurse being an author. The best part is single blind review

Thumb e4882a98 ff67 4785 a7c0 d2e425ffa504
Gabisile Zwane 3 months ago

Transparent peer review

Thumb default avatar
Paul Udom 3 months ago

I will prefer double - blind peer review.

Thumb 05
Dr.D. Nagarajan 3 months ago

I would prefer the double blind peer review.

Thumb default avatar
WallaceWaweru 2 months ago

i prefer the double blind peer review

Thumb default avatar
WallaceWaweru 2 months ago

blind peer review system

Thumb default avatar
WallaceWaweru 2 months ago

the double blind peer review.

Thumb default avatar
Clemence Njehoya about 2 months ago

As an author, Ithink the first two are good. for the first because the author will never have a chance to contact the reviewers and try to convince them to select the paper.

In the second case it is good because no ones name or scientific reputation will influence the judgement of the reviewers.

Thumb sefater cover picture
Sefater Gbashi 29 days ago

Personally, I prefer double-blind peer review both as a reviewer and as an author 

Thumb default avatar
Jemilugba Olufunto 26 days ago

Single Blind Review

Thumb img 5343
EMMANUEL FUNDISI 26 days ago

single blind

Thumb default avatar

I prefer the double blind review since there won't be direct contact between authors and reviewers

Thumb default avatar
Herbert Makgopa 14 days ago

I have preference of double-blind over other types of peer review, in large part because under the double-blind system, there is hopefully less of a risk of peer reviewer comments being based on biases about the authors. And needless to say, in scientific research, bias should at all costs be minimized or avoided, so as not to affect the integrity of the study.

Thumb default avatar
Ayodele Boglo 4 days ago

double-blind

Thumb default avatar
Ying Wang 2 days ago

I would say transparent peer review is better for me, since it really show the whole story of the paper and how the reviewers contribute their work also.