Peer reviewers can not disproportionately reject journal papers from women and ethnic minorities
if author identities are hidden.
Not exact matches
Writing reviews and interviewing
authors is great
if that's your business, but
if you want to sell books, you need to understand who your audience is (before you do anything else) and then create content that they actually want, and helps build your brand
identity as an
author of [whatever genre].
This first volume in the Fourth Realm trilogy announced the arrival of a major
if mysterious talent (Twelve Hawks is a pseudonym, and the
author's real
identity has remained unknown).
That book would never have been published
if the real
identity of the
author hadn't been revealed — this despite good reviews, etc. before Rowling was outed.
But you can also choose your pen name based on other factors:
if there's already an
author or other celebrity with your name or something very similar, who you want to be next to on the shelves, hiding your
identity (but honestly, this is harder and harder these days).
If they all have the same strong visual
identity, you will appear to readers as a professional and prolific
author in your genre.
To get mildly blunt about it,
if we are to rule out all - women's awards programs, on the thinking that they're as Bennett summarizes the criticism, «sexist, a ghetto and, in divisive focus on sexual
identity, an almost absurd contradiction of fiction's imaginative purpose,» then are we ready to insist that the «real world,» the wider industry and marketplace promote women, both as
authors and as reviewers, as readily as it does men?
For example,
if you agree that people of all ideological and cultural and political stripes are vulnerable to
identity - oriented «motivated - reasoning,» then what do you think about articles that finger point about about the biases among «liberal» scientists even as the political orientation of the
author is dismissed as a potentially relevant factor?
If they didn't believe a Mexican telling them that raters can't be biased with respect to the outcome of the study — since said outcome in entirely in their hands — or the importance of independence, and bliindness to the
identity of the
authors / participants, I assume they just asked some white people who would know, some social scientists who are experts in subjective rater study design, interrater reliability, etc..
or maybe more precisely, why (
if) did the Commission prevent the disclosure of the
authors»
identity?)
RCInet.ca reserves the right not to publish comments
if there is any doubt as to the
identity of their
author.
According to the
authors if the project, it is not right to «build any
identity into an open permissionless network.»
In my opinion, this subject letter is a concocted effort, and
if you're puzzled as to the
author's general
if not specific
identity you might want to think about the overall message of the letter itself, which is: that in order to avoid a nightmare experience like the one described you clearly need someone other than a REALTOR and your typical Home Inspector — ah yes, that would only leave a: Real Estate Con........!