Abstract

 
 

Footnotes (64)



 


 



Peer Review and Legal Publishing: What Law Librarians Need to Know about Open, Single-Blind, and Double-Blind Reviewing


Nancy McCormack


Faculty of Law, Queen's University

February 7, 2009

Law Library Journal, Vol. 101, No. 59, 2009

Abstract:     
Legal publishing is changing, and more legal periodicals are requiring that submitted papers undergo peer review using one of three systems: open, single-blind, or double-blind. As the use of peer review in these journals increases, and as the call for law reviews to change their method of article selection grows, our patrons will want to know the difference between the various peer review methods and why a journal's editors might select one method over another. Professor McCormack provides an overview of all three methods, and discusses the future of the peer review process in the publication of articles in legal periodicals.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 12

Keywords: peer review, legal publishing, single-blind, double-blind, legal periodicals, legal scholarship, law reviews

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 7, 2009  

Suggested Citation

McCormack, Nancy, Peer Review and Legal Publishing: What Law Librarians Need to Know about Open, Single-Blind, and Double-Blind Reviewing (February 7, 2009). Law Library Journal, Vol. 101, No. 59, 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1339227

Contact Information

Nancy McCormack (Contact Author)
Faculty of Law, Queen's University ( email )
128 Union St.
Macdonald Hall
Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6
Canada
613-533-2465 (Phone)
613-533-2594 (Fax)
HOME PAGE: http://law.queensu.ca/facultyAndStaff/facultyDirectory/mccormack.html
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 948
Downloads: 170
Download Rank: 88,328
Footnotes:  64

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.406 seconds