Testing for reviewer anchoring in peer review: A randomized controlled trial
Our randomized controlled trial consists of 108 researchers as participants. First, we find that our intervention was successful at creating a difference in perceived paper quality between the flawed and corrected versions: Using a permutation test with the Mann-Whitney U statistic, we find that the experimental group's initial scores are lower than the control group's scores in both the Evaluation category (Vargha-Delaney A = 0.64, p = 0.0096) and Overall score (A = 0.59, p = 0.058). Next, we test for anchoring by comparing the experimental group's revised scores with the control group's scores. We find no significant evidence of anchoring in either the Overall (A = 0.50, p = 0.61) or Evaluation category (A = 0.49, p = 0.61). The Mann-Whitney U represents the number of individual pairwise comparisons across groups in which the value from the specified group is stochastically greater, while the Vargha-Delaney A is the normalized version in [0, 1].
Authors
- Ryan Liu (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8755-649X)
- Nihar B. Shah (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5158-9677)
- Steven Jecmen (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3151-7489)
- Vincent Conitzer (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1899-7884)
- Fei Fang (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2256-8329)
Institutions
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- PLoS ONE
- Published
- 2024-11-18
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301111
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Software Engineering Research
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.78
Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Division of Information and Intelligent Systems