IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Author's Rights

Alan Baxter agb16 at mbuc.bio.cam.ac.uk
Thu Dec 24 02:50:04 EST 1992

With regards to the following:

"I found it interesting when looking for academic jobs a long time back
that faculty I spoke to at some small schools felt that reviewers were
excessively critical of their work versus papers that originated from 
"name" schools.  Of course, there may be other reasons (as I am sure  
scientists from name schools might quickly reply), but I was wondering
whether or not any journals ever review papers either completely blind
(no mention of the authors' identity and affiliation) or partially    
blind (e.g., no mention of the affiliation)?  This might be an        
interesting experiment?!?"

The problem with that is that science is very much a matter of reputation.
Unless reviewers actually repeat the experiment as part of the review
process the only guarantee that the results are real is the reputation
of the authors. I for one would be very distressed if certain workers
in my field (who have on several occasions fabricated results) were 
submitted to a review process as kind and forgiving as that given to 
an unknown.

Regards Alan

More information about the Jrnlnote mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net