About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
TheScientificWorldJOURNAL
Volume 6 (2006), Pages 1274-1277
http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/tsw.2006.228
Opinion Paper

Double Anonymity and the Peer Review Process

Analytical Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex, TW11 0LW, UK

Received 12 September 2006; Accepted 28 September 2006

Copyright © 2006 Richard Brown.

Abstract

The process of peer review for submissions to scientific journals is a well-established and widely used procedure. Review by one's peers is a well-recognised and long-standing method of appraisal. Throughout all branches of science, medicine, humanities, art, literature, politics, sport, and in fact almost all areas of human endeavour, the judgement of work by an individual or group of experts in similar fields of study is the most rigorous and valuable form of recognition. “Peer review”, as this process is commonly known, is an important method of assuring quality, relevance and novelty of work. However, is there still room for improvement in the procedural aspects of peer review?