“The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review” (2016), by Rebecca M. Blank. Arts and Humanities research paper. Original abstract below, unchanged. No free PDF was found.

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

Rebecca M. Blank · January 1, 2016 · Arts and Humanities

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.

Source page