Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review

Single-blind vs Double-blind Peer Review in the Setting of Author Prestige

(2016) Kanu Okike et al.   JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

Estimating peer effects in networks with peer encouragement designs

(2016) Dean Eckles et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Emerging trends in peer review—a survey

(2015) Richard Walker et al.   Frontiers in Neuroscience

Conferences versus journals in computer science

(2015) George Vrettas et al.   Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Double-blind reviewing

(2009) Henning Schulzrinne   ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review

Improving publication quality by reducing bias with double-blind reviewing and author response

(2008) Kathryn S. McKinley   ACM SIGPLAN NOTICES

Does double-blind review benefit female authors?

(2008) Thomas J. Webb et al.   TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION

Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors

(2007) A BUDDEN et al.   TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION