Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The impact of introducing double-blind reviewing in the most recent Evolution of Language conference is assessed. The ranking of papers is compared between EvoLang 11 (double-blind review) and EvoLang 9 and 10 (single-blind review). Main effects were found for first author gender by conference. The results mirror some findings in the literature on the effects of double-blind review, suggesting that it helps reduce a bias against female authors.
Roberts et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: