Goodbye Scholarship. How Double-Blind Peer Review Affects Legal Publishing

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Double-blind peer review does not significantly improve the quality of legal scholarship, and transparency is preferred.
Anonymity can hinder responsibility and respect in the academic community, reducing engagement and accountability.
The responsibility for publishing decisions should primarily rest with journal editors rather than anonymous reviewers.
The practice of double-blind peer review may undermine valuable relationships in legal academia focused on divergent views.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

This article critiques double-blind peer review in legal scholarship, suggesting transparency enhances accountability.

Resta et al. (2025) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark