On Equitable Non-Anonymous Review

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Remco Heesen has recently argued in favor of the editorial practice of triple-anonymous review on the grounds that ``an injustice is committed against certain authors'' under non-anonymous review. On the other hand, he concedes that the information waste of triple-anonymous review does handicap editors, in particular sacrificing a boost in the average quality of accepted papers that would otherwise be conferred by non-anonymous review. In this paper it is observed that by devoting comparatively greater reviewing resources to the papers of unfamiliar authors, editors practicing non-anonymous review can, without loss of information, avoid subjecting authors to the sorts of injustices observed by Heesen. Thus they can reap the efficiency gains of non-anonymous review without sacrificing fairness.
Categories
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MCCOEN
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-01-20
View other versions
Added to PP index
2020-01-20

Total views
43 ( #47,209 of 53,703 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #43,992 of 53,703 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.