Nicole, On Feb 10, 2008 4:13 PM, Nicole Ellison <nellison@msu.edu> wrote: [...]
Assuming some of you share these goals, how do we reconcile the common act of putting early-stage work online, either as blog posts/talk cribs (like danah) or as full papers, while maintaining blind peer review? [...]
We don't. At least in our area, I think double-blind refereeing has a pretty short future. There is a question as to what degree something is really blind anyway. Even without resorting to Google, some large proportion of the papers I see as a referee are familiar enough in style or topic that I can guess who it is (or at least who the authors spend a lot of time with!). This is even easier with authors who are addicted to self-citation. Even if I haven't seen the paper presented at a conference, blogged, or an earlier piece of the research published, there is a good chance that I could guess the author if I really wanted to. Maybe this is why JASIST and some conferences use single-blind refereeing? Alex -- -- // // This email is // [X] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais // Social Architect // http://alex.halavais.net //