Submitted by Wes McDermott (not verified) on Wed, 2006-09-13 18:15.

While there are reasons for blinded (or double-blinded) peer review, there is also something to be said for "identifiable" peer review, especially in an open forum like PLoS ONE. If reviewers are identifiable, then concern for their own reputations will motivate them to keep their comments as constructive (or at least, valid) as possible. A glance at almost any internet forum will show how poor an online discussion can get when some participants feel they have nothing to lose.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
More information about formatting options
Captcha Image: you will need to recognize the text in it.
Please type in the letters/numbers that are shown in the image above.
Please enter capital letters only.