I’m often asked why DTRAP is using a double blind system for reviews.
The answer: We want to limit the amount of bias in the system.
It’s common for the reviewers to be anonymous to the authors, that way the authors can’t influence the reviewers directly. It also removes the appearance of influence, whether or not there is. You may be good friends with the reviewer and trust them implicitly to do the right thing, but the appearance of a relationship can make an outsider believe that your article was only published due to the relationship.
On the other hand, if the reviewer knows who the author is but not vice versa, the same appearance of bias can crop up. The reviewer may have pre-existing biases against or for the author and may unconsciously (or consciously) be a victim to them.
We don’t want any appearance of bias to appear. We want good papers that people with a knowledge of the field evaluate, but we don’t want a bias to crop up. This is why we’re using a double blind system for reviews.
This of course, doesn’t take into account whether or not peer review is the best system for finding good work. There is research on this subject and I won’t subject you to an analysis of it. I will say that at this time, peer review is the best solution we have for finding good work.
We are doing our best at DTRAP to evaluate your research without the appearance of bias. Submit your work to https://dtrap.acm.org/ and be sure to anonymize it first.