Single versus Double Blind Reviewing at WSDM 2017 — mentioned by bo1024

Fri, 01 Dec 2017 01:19:01 GMT

This is very cool, but I'm having trouble following the method behind the results. Say concretely, the result that single-blind reviewers give higher reviews to papers from prestigious sources. Can anyone help me understand? https://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.00502.pdf They give each paper a "blind" score bqps from the blind reviewers only. Then they fit the vector Theta to the model in 5.1 and present Theta in Table 5. They also present a p-value for each entry of Theta. In particular, for com (top company), uni (top university), and fam (famous author) the p-values are below 0.05. Bu I didn't see…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing at WSDM 2017 — HN submission

Sun, 05 Feb 2017 01:24:41 GMT

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing at WSDM 2017 · HackerPapers discussions

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing at WSDM 2017 — mentioned by bo1024

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing at WSDM 2017 — HN submission