4 ms·
This is the standard in most disciplines. I wish the authors of this article had done the same test with journals that do blind reviewing. I'd bet they still go
by kenko 13y ago
This is the standard in most disciplines. I wish the authors of this article had done the same test with journals that do blind reviewing. I'd bet they still got a lot of rejections of previously accepted articles for bizarre reasons, since in general acceptance depends a lot on the particular reviewers you draw.
- leephillips 13y ago"This is the standard in most disciplines." Any citation for this? I'm curious, because in physics, although this is often suggested, it has not been generally adopted.
- kenko 13y agoReally? I guess I should've said "this is standard in most disciplines ... that I know about". I'm really surprised that it isn't done in physics!
- tensor 13y agoIt's not done in CS either. It varies greatly by sub-topic though.
- gcr 13y agoIn computer vision conferences, reviewing is almost always double-blind. In computer vision journals, reviewing is only half-duplex blind -- the reviewers can see who you are, but not vice versa.