It might happen unconsciously. But in my experience it's not that easy for a reviewer to consciously use writing cues for anything useful. Sometimes it seems v

It might happen unconsciously. But in my experience it's not that easy for a reviewer to consciously use writing cues for anything useful. Sometimes it seems very obvious that a given paper is by specific authors (either because of style, or because of how familiar it is with their previous work) but I've had many experiences where I later learned that my supposition was completely wrong. Similarly, when you encounter a paper that doesn't have any obvious cues (which is the overwhelming majority of them) then it's pretty much impossible to tell whether it's an author you admire or someone you've never heard of -- and this is a good thing. Some conferences don't use blind submissions, and yes: I have felt an awful lot of influence there. "Surely [famous Turing-award winning authors] don't need me to double-check their proof."