Related papers: Effectiveness of Anonymization in Double-Blind Rev…

There is widespread debate on whether to anonymize author identities in peer review. The key argument for anonymization is to mitigate bias, whereas arguments against anonymization posit various uses of author identities in the review…

Double-blind peer review is considered a pillar of academic research because it is perceived to ensure a fair, unbiased, and fact-centered scientific discussion. Yet, experienced researchers can often correctly guess from which research…

Peer review is widely regarded as essential for advancing scientific research. However, reviewers may be biased by authors' prestige or other characteristics. Double-blind peer review, in which the authors' identities are masked from the…

Anonymous peer review is used by the great majority of computer science conferences. OpenReview is such a platform that aims to promote openness in peer review process. The paper, (meta) reviews, rebuttals, and final decisions are all…

In this paper we study the implications for conference program committees of using single-blind reviewing, in which committee members are aware of the names and affiliations of paper authors, versus double-blind reviewing, in which this…

Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. The aims of this study are to analyse the demographics of corresponding authors choosing double blind peer review, and…

Peer review is a process designed to produce a fair assessment of research quality before the publication of scholarly work in a journal. Demographics, nepotism, and seniority have been all shown to affect reviewer behavior suggesting the…

We consider the issue of biases in scholarly research, specifically, in peer review. There is a long standing debate on whether exposing author identities to reviewers induces biases against certain groups, and our focus is on designing…

In this paper, we investigate the effects of releasing arXiv preprints of papers that are undergoing a double-blind review process. In particular, we ask the following research question: What is the relation between de-anonymization of…

Prior research has investigated the benefits and costs of double-anonymous review (DAR, also known as double-blind review) in comparison to single-anonymous review (SAR) and open review (OR). Several review papers have attempted to compile…

Peer review often involves reviewers submitting their independent reviews, followed by a discussion among reviewers of each paper. A question among policymakers is whether the reviewers of a paper should be anonymous to each other during…

Authorship obfuscation techniques hold the promise of helping people protect their privacy in online communications by automatically rewriting text to hide the identity of the original author. However, obfuscation has been evaluated in…

Speaker anonymization aims to conceal a speaker's identity, without considering the linguistic content. In this study, we reveal a weakness of Librispeech, the dataset that is commonly used to evaluate anonymizers: the books read by the…

For sensitive text data to be shared among NLP researchers and practitioners, shared documents need to comply with data protection and privacy laws. There is hence a growing interest in automated approaches for text anonymization. However,…

Authorship disambiguation is crucial for advancing studies in science of science. However, assessing the quality of authorship disambiguation in large-scale databases remains challenging since it is difficult to manually curate a…

Large language models are increasingly discussed and used as tools that may assist with scholarly peer review, but empirical evidence regarding how authors use and perceive AI-based feedback remains limited. This paper reports findings from…

The peer review process is often regarded as the gatekeeper of scientific integrity, yet increasing evidence suggests that it is not immune to bias. Although structural inequities in peer review have been widely debated, much less attention…

Peer-review venues have increasingly adopted open reviewing policies that publicly release anonymized reviews and permit public commenting. Venues have adopted a variety of policies, and there is still ongoing debate about the benefits and…

Voice anonymisation aims to conceal the voice identity of speakers in speech recordings. Privacy protection is usually estimated from the difficulty of using a speaker verification system to re-identify the speaker post-anonymisation.…

In speaker anonymization, speech recordings are modified in a way that the identity of the speaker remains hidden. While this technology could help to protect the privacy of individuals around the globe, current research restricts this by…