Reviewing Results-Free Manuscripts

An open-access journal is trialing a peer-review process in which reviewers do not have access to the results or discussion sections of submitted papers.

Written byBob Grant
| 2 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
2:00
Share

BMC Psychology is trialing a new method of peer review that obscures results and discussion sections from reviewers.WIKIMEDIA, CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEWResults-free peer review is getting its day in court, thanks to BMC Psychology, an open-access journal that is launching the first-ever randomized controlled trial of the process. Results-free peer review puts manuscripts before reviewers without divulging results or discussion sections until the end of the process. In theory, this alteration to traditional peer review decreases publication bias by forcing reviewers to focus solely on methodology and approach to an experimental question.

“Publication bias is a serious issue in academic publishing because it distorts the evidence available to clinicians, researchers, and policymakers—potentially leading to false conclusions that could have severe consequences,” said Katherine Button, a University of Bath scientist and advocate for improving the transparency of research, in a statement.

BMC Psychology will conduct an initial pilot phase of the trial, testing the feasibility and efficiency of the new peer-review process on the first 10 manuscripts whose authors opt in to the study. Then, authors who consent to the full trial will have their manuscripts randomly assigned to results-free or traditional peer review.

“In the first stage of review, the manuscript will be 'accepted in principle' based on the rationale and methods only,” Liz Bal, associate publisher ...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member? Login Here

Related Topics

Meet the Author

  • From 2017 to 2022, Bob Grant was Editor in Chief of The Scientist, where he started in 2007 as a Staff Writer. Before joining the team, he worked as a reporter at Audubon and earned a master’s degree in science journalism from New York University. In his previous life, he pursued a career in science, getting a bachelor’s degree in wildlife biology from Montana State University and a master’s degree in marine biology from the College of Charleston in South Carolina. Bob edited Reading Frames and other sections of the magazine.

    View Full Profile
Share
Illustration of a developing fetus surrounded by a clear fluid with a subtle yellow tinge, representing amniotic fluid.
January 2026, Issue 1

What Is the Amniotic Fluid Composed of?

The liquid world of fetal development provides a rich source of nutrition and protection tailored to meet the needs of the growing fetus.

View this Issue
Skip the Wait for Protein Stability Data with Aunty

Skip the Wait for Protein Stability Data with Aunty

Unchained Labs
Graphic of three DNA helices in various colors

An Automated DNA-to-Data Framework for Production-Scale Sequencing

illumina
Exploring Cellular Organization with Spatial Proteomics

Exploring Cellular Organization with Spatial Proteomics

Abstract illustration of spheres with multiple layers, representing endoderm, ectoderm, and mesoderm derived organoids

Organoid Origins and How to Grow Them

Thermo Fisher Logo

Products

Brandtech Logo

BRANDTECH Scientific Introduces the Transferpette® pro Micropipette: A New Twist on Comfort and Control

Biotium Logo

Biotium Launches GlycoLiner™ Cell Surface Glycoprotein Labeling Kits for Rapid and Selective Cell Surface Imaging

Colorful abstract spiral dot pattern on a black background

Thermo Scientific X and S Series General Purpose Centrifuges

Thermo Fisher Logo
Abstract background with red and blue laser lights

VANTAstar Flexible microplate reader with simplified workflows

BMG LABTECH