Re:Is Peer Review a Good Idea? (2020)
by mturmon on Tuesday September 13, 2022 @09:11PM
(#32832121)
So, I could be charitably described as mid-career, and I had this discussion a few times a couple decades ago -- in which I took the position you have. It's not an unreasonable position.
I was a PC member for what is now called NeurIPS, and I remember one particular disagreement with a conference co-chair who advocated blinded reviews.
I have since come to believe that the above objections to blinding are mistaken, and that things should generally be moved to double-blind where at all possible.
What happened is, I participated in blinded review processes (for proposals and for conferences) and they turned out to be different. Just that level of de-coupling -- where you aren't 100% sure that the author/proposer is who you suspect -- turns out to matter a great deal psychologically. It changes the framing. And more important, the results seem better.
I was a PC member for what is now called NeurIPS, and I remember one particular disagreement with a conference co-chair who advocated blinded reviews.
I have since come to believe that the above objections to blinding are mistaken, and that things should generally be moved to double-blind where at all possible.
What happened is, I participated in blinded review processes (for proposals and for conferences) and they turned out to be different. Just that level of de-coupling -- where you aren't 100% sure that the author/proposer is who you suspect -- turns out to matter a great deal psychologically. It changes the framing. And more important, the results seem better.