How does Editorial Manager anonymize peer reviewers?
In the journal configuration, reviewer anonymizing settings can be customized to control which details the reviewer can see about the Authors. An example would be:
Each article type can be customized so that only certain file types appear in the Reviewer PDF and what details and metadata will appear on the PDF cover page.
The role of a reviewer can be defined so that different sources of information can be enabled or disabled that might directly or indirectly reveal the author’s identity.
The letter templates can be modified so that certain information can be merged or not. Merge codes can still be added or removed by editors and information can still be hidden or revealed.
Reviewers can view an HiddenRefer Anonymize decision letter without having to see the author’s name, affiliation, etc. when viewing an author decision letter.
Three areas of reviewer anonymization are described in detail in this article, along with common terminology for Peer Review anonymizing policies.
Single-Anonymized Review: Refers to a journal in which authors cannot see the identities of reviewers while reviewers can see the identities of authors. Reviewers can customize the level of detail shown in EM according to their preferences, but in general, Single-Anonymized means that they can see the full list of authors, including their names and affiliations.
A journal with double-anonymized reviews is one where authors are not allowed to know who reviews their work, and reviewers are not allowed to know who authors are. In addition to this, authors are required to prepare no revealing details in the main manuscript, as well as a separate file with author information for editors. The next section describes how to configure Double-Anonymized in EM.
Double-anonymized review is not the only method of concealing information from some parties. Some journal policies specify even more information to be concealed from some parties. The term ‘Triple-Anonymized’ is used in different ways by different journals, so it is difficult to determine whether or not it is achievable in an EM setting. The exact privacy needs should be discussed with your journal manager and publisher if more privacy is required than Double-Anonymized. For instance:
Hide the identity of the editor: It is possible to do this by carefully tailoring all correspondence not to mention the editor. Editors should not be accidentally cc’ed on any correspondence to authors that includes editor merge codes.
To hide editor identity from reviewers, carefully customize all correspondence so that no editor details are included, and disable reviewers’ permission to view editor assignment history and details. It is important that no editor merge codes are accidentally included in letters to reviewers, or that such letters do not cc editors.
Editors can always see an author’s name via the author menu. Hiding author identities in EM is impossible.
The editor cannot be assigned a role that allows them to make decisions without seeing the identity of the reviewers.
Anonymize reviewers in mixed ways: Some journals opt to double-anonymize some reviewers while allowing others, such as editorial board members, to view author information. Different reviewer roles can be defined with some care in configuration. Due to the fact that all reviewers get the same PDF, the Reviewer PDF must be built to the strictest standard. The reviewer menu can provide additional information to one role based on settings. If letters are used only for one reviewer role, the additional information can also be shared, but care must be taken not to accidentally use the wrong letter and reveal information that should remain a secret.