Skip to main content
Basic Technical IVT Commonly tested

Double-Blind Peer Review Implementation

noun

Pronunciation: /ˌdʌb.əl ˈblaɪnd pɪr rɪˈvjuː ɪm.plɪ.men.ˈteɪ.ʃən/

A peer review process where both reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other to reduce bias and ensure objective evaluation. This methodology is designed to prevent author prestige bias, reviewer conflicts, and promote merit-based assessment.

Plain English

A review system where reviewers and authors don't know each other's identities to make evaluation fairer.

Etymology & History

Origin languageEnglish, Latin
Rootdouble from Old French; blind from Old English; peer from Middle English; implementation from Latin implere
First recorded use1970s
Usage frequencyVery common

Usage

"The journal switched to double-blind peer review implementation to minimize institutional bias in reviewer assessments."

Style guide notes: Hyphenate 'double-blind' when used attributively; specify 'implementation' when discussing adoption.

Also known as

double-blind review mutual anonymity review reciprocal anonymity

Contrasted with

single-blind review open peer review

Related Terms

Frequently Asked Questions

How do reviewers remain anonymous in double-blind review?

Manuscripts are submitted without author identifying information; reviewer identities are never disclosed to authors.

What are benefits of double-blind peer review?

Reduces author prestige bias, prevents reviewer conflicts, ensures fairer merit-based evaluation of research quality.

Why Test Candidates on This?

Core concept for editorial quality assurance and peer review integrity assessment.

Required skill level: Mid

Editors from these organisations have used our services since 1998

Reuters BBC Oxford University Press Penguin Random House Springer Microsoft Suncor Energy United Nations Fisher Investments IBM The Home Depot KODAK CHEVRON