Does double?blind peer review reduce bias? Evidence from a top computer science conference

Peer review is essential for advancing scientific research, but there are long-standing concerns that authors' prestige or other characteristics can bias reviewers. Double-blind peer has been proposed as a way to reduce reviewer bias, the evidence its effectiveness limited and mixed. Here, we examine effects of double-blind by analyzing files 5,027 papers submitted top computer science conference changed reviewing format from single- in 2018. First, find scores given most prestigious authors significantly decreased after switching review. However, because many these were above threshold acceptance, change did not affect paper acceptance significantly. Second, inter-reviewer disagreement increased format. Third, rejected single-blind cited more than those under double-blind, suggesting better excludes poorer quality papers. Lastly, an apparently unrelated rating scale 10 4 points likely reduced such papers' was affected. These results support reducing biases, while opening new research directions on impact peer-review formats.