Double Blind Peer-Review in Logistics

Pre-publication peer-review forms the basis for how scholarly journals assess whether an article is suitable for publication. It is of paramount importance that the process is seen to be fair, robust and free of bias. One of the key methods for achieving these goals is blinding. Up until now, Logistics has used single blind peer-review, where the reviewer identities are not known to authors. Journal editors take responsibility for the final acceptance decision, taking into account the reports provided by expert reviewers in the field.

In a single-blind process, authors may feel that they are not fairly treated. There is the suspicion that a renowned figure may be given an easy ride by reviewers, or that early career scholars are considered too inexperienced to assert their opinions. As the Logistics journal continues to gain stature as a respected outlet for global research on developments in supply chains, we take such input seriously.

For this reason, I have decided to move Logistics to a double-blind peer-review process. For papers submitted after 22 June 2021, reviewers will not be informed of the author names of manuscripts until a final decision has been made. We believe that this policy will reduce bias and, in particular, help emerging scholars to receive a fair review. We are aware that no system is perfect, and some doubts have been raised about the extent to which double blind review solves the problem of reviewer bias. However, our aim is to demonstrate the commitment to scholarly endeavor at Logistics.

We would like to take this opportunity to thank all the anonymous reviewers who contribute to the peer-review process. Their voluntary contributions, based on their experiences in the field, help us to maintain a high standard in our published papers and underpin our editorial process. Your extraordinary contributions are foundational to the success of Logistics as a respected journal in the field.