In our newest “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:

What is the protocol for when a journal (accidentally) reveals identities in a blind peer review? I’ve experienced this a few times lately, from both sides: As an author, I got the reviewer’s comments and could still see their name. As a reviewer, I got a paper that still contained the author’s name (both top-level special journals in my field, btw). What should one do in such a case? Report to the journal? Pretend nothing happened? Decline to review?

Good questions, and I’m curious to hear what people think. First, I think it’s worth noting that not all journals have anonymized review. In some science-y fields (including some philosophy of science journals), journals have authors submit papers with their identifying issue available to reviewers. So, although I don’t know for sure, something like that might have happened here. But, if not, I think the right thing to do is to draw the problem to the editors’ attention and, if you’re a reviewer, decline to review. I’ve heard some people say that they tell the editor, and then let the editor decide whether to let the review proceed. But I think this is bad practice. If a journal is supposed to have anonymized review and that is compromised, then the review should not proceed, whatever the editors might say or do–as it goes against the journal’s own stated editorial policy. 

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?

Originally appeared on The Philosophers’ Cocoon Read More