Double-blind reviewing - More placebo than miracle cure?

Computer Communication Review

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 56-59

  Schulzrinne, Henning ^a  

^a Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science   (United States)

Author keywords

Conference organization; Conferences in computer science; Double blind reviews; Reviewing

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION; DBR; REVIEW PROCESS; REVIEWING; REVIEWING PROCESS;

COMMUNICATION;

EID: 84872693412     PISSN: 01464833     EISSN: 19435819     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1517480.1517492     Document Type: Review

References (8)

1. M. Faloutsos, A. Banerjee, and R. Rejaie, "You must be joking: a historic open reviewing at Global Internet '07," ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 37, pp. 79-82, July 2007.
2. R. Snodgrass, "Single- versus double-blind reviewing: An analysis of the literature," SIGMOD Record, Vol. 35, pp. 8-21, Sept. 2006.
3. S. Madden and D. DeWitt, "Impact of double-blind reviewing on sigmod publication rates," SIGMOD Record, Vol. 35, pp. 29-32, June 2006.
4. A. Kumar, P. A. Joseph, M. Goldweber, and P. J. Wagner, "Reviewing the SIGCSE reviewing process," SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 40, pp. 84-89, June 2008.
5. R. Snodgrass, "Frequently-asked questions about double-blind reviewing," SIGMOD Record, Vol. 36, pp. 60-62, Mar. 2007.
6. K. S. McKinley, "Improving publication quality by reducing bias with double-blind reviewing and author response," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Vol. 43, Aug. 2008.
7. A. Feldmann, "Experiences from the Sigcomm 2005 European shadow PC experiment," ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 35, pp. 97-102, July 2005.
8. S. Hill and F. Provost, "The myth of the double-blind review? Author identification using only citations," ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, Vol. 5, pp. 179-184, Dec. 2003.