On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Judy Goldsmith wrote:
> In the structural complexity community, this idea is brought up once
> in a while and dismissed. The community is small enough and tight
> enough that people tend to know about papers (not all, but a significant
> number) before they are submitted, and tend to recognize writing styles.
> At best, blind reviewing would simply remind the reviewers that they
> are supposed to be ignoring personal opinions about the authors. I guess
> that community trusts its reviewers to do so without that form of
> reminder.
I would like to stress this point. Double-blind reviewing will be
ineffective in hiding the identity of the authors in relatively small
communities where the reviewers would most likely have heard of the
previous work of the authors. IJCAI or SIGMOD are conferences that
represent much larger communities than the UAI community, and there
double blind reviewing is more justified and, perhaps, more effective.
Double blind reviewing also somewhat disfavors papers that are followups
of previously published work by the same researchers as no longer
the "in our previous work we did ..." references are acceptable. Replacing
with with "A and B did ... We extend this work ..." sometimes does not do
enough to hide the identity of the authors.
Alex
-- -------------------------------X---------------------------------- Alexander Dekhtyar (859) 257 1839 (phone) Assistant Professor (859) 323 1971 (fax) Department of Computer Science University of Kentucky dekhtyar@cs.uky.edu http://www.cs.uky.edu/~dekhtyar -------------------------------X----------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2001 - 18:41:41 PST