thanks Chitu, although it is totally not my field, it looks really
interesting!
(downloaded from:
http://ftp.cs.arizona.edu/~rts/pubs/SIGMODRecordSept06.pdf
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Chitu Okoli <Chitu.Okoli(a)concordia.ca>wrote;wrote:
I know this is an old branch of this topic, but since
it generated quite
some interest on this list, I thought I'd share this excellent article I
recently found on double-blind vs. single-blind reviewing. It addresses
most of the issues that were discussed in this sub-thread.
In brief, the editor of a prominent computer science journal recounts his
exploration on which way to go with his journal. The journal decided to go
double-blind because of its benefits (mainly protecting less powerful
researchers), but his journal has a very detailed set of instructions (in
the appendix) that do an excellent job addressing computer science projects
that are difficult to anonymize, which I think are very much applicable to
a wiki-based journal as discussed in this thread.
Snodgrass, Richard T. 2007. Editorial: Single- versus double-blind
reviewing. *ACM Trans. Database Syst.* 32, 1.
<http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1206049.1206050><http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1206049.1206050>
If you don't have access to the ACM Digital Library, you can get a PDF of
the article from Google Scholar.
~ Chitu
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
__________________________
dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
profesor zarządzania
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i centrum badawczego CROW
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl