Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Correspondence
Nature 452, 28 (6 March 2008) | doi:10.1038/452028a; Published online 5 March 2008
Open Innovation Challenges
-
Optimizing Sub-cellular Localization Tags
The Seeker is looking for methods to optimize sub-cellular localization tags for protein expression....
-
Novel Approaches to Protecting Maize from Insect Damage
The Seeker is looking for novel approaches to protecting maize from insect damage. This Challenge re...
- More Challenges
- Powered by:
nature jobs
Postdoctoral Fellowship in Genetic Epidemiology
- McGill University
- Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Post Doctoral Research Associate
- University of Illinois
- Urbana United States
Who stands to lose from double-blind review?
Boyan K. Garvalov1
- Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology, Am Klopferspitz 18, 82152 Martinsried, Germany
Why do journals expect scientists to use double-blind methods in their research, but refuse to apply a double-blind approach in evaluating that same research? The Editorial 'Working double-blind'(Nature 451, 605–606; doi:10.1038/451605b 2008
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.
RESEARCH
Double-blind review: easy to guess in specialist fieldsNature Correspondence (06 Mar 2008)
Double-blind review: the paw print is a giveawayNature Correspondence (06 Mar 2008)
Double-blind review: let diversity reignNature Correspondence (06 Mar 2008)
