Anonymity in Peer Review

In a recent blog post, Michael Smith has raised important concerns about the anonymity of peer review. I wish to raise another. In their endless quest to invade our privacy, companies like Microsoft and Adobe have reduced or eliminated the anonymity of document authorship. In other words, personal information such as your name or affiliation may be embedded in electronic documents that you create. I realized this as I was writing up a peer review a few days ago. This could, obviously, compromise the anonymity of peer review. If you send your review to a journal editor in a document that contains your name and then he or she forwards it to the article authors, they could easily discover your name. In some cases, just your institutional affiliation would be sufficient to identify you. I, for example, am the only Maya archaeologist at my university, so it would be relatively easy to deduce who a reviewer was if the name of the university were hidden in the document properties.

In fact, you can remove such information from Word documents and, I believe, pdfs.  I had to dig through a bunch of help files to find out how to do it, and then I changed my settings to prevent saving personalized information. Of course, the new settings now force me to click on pop-up dialogue boxes every time I save a document. That won't get old.

So, you might want to check the document properties before you send a supposedly anonymous review to an editor.

Wiley's Manuscript submission system

Am I the only one who hates the manuscript management systems used by the big publishers? I asked this once before, in a rant about the Elsevier system, but I received no response. Now I've had a similarly unpleasant experience with what I think is Wiley's system, although in this case I was simply trying to submit a peer-review of an article.

First I found through trial and error that I had to change not one but two of my browser settings just to get the site to work. Then I had to change my password because they revamped the website and my old password, which was difficult to find, wouldn't work. Then they tried to force me to create a profile. Then I closed my browser and gave up. That's just far too much crap to go through for the privilege of reviewing an article. I thought nothing could be worse than Elsevier's website, but  I may have been wrong.

This probably all sounds petulant and querulous, but how much hassle should I put up with for the privilege of doing free work for a huge multinational corporation?

Peer review is a form of unpaid community service upon which these journals rely, so I am frankly astonished that the highly paid executives running these companies would make it harder for scholars to perform it.

It's crazy enough that I donate my time so that these corporations can get richer. I'm not inclined to jump through a bunch of hoops to do it. I'm happy to contribute to the advancement of science if the journal is published by a scientific society, but doing it for commercial publishers is just getting silly.