Dr. James M. Cantor

Mainpage  >  Short articles, Q&As  >  BS&L Ed board with pubs

 

Misconceptions of Masked Peer Review

 

The great majority of scholarly journals employ a masked peer review system in evaluating which manuscripts should go on to be published.  Specialized fields contain limited numbers of experts, so researchers rely heavily on each others’ feedback.  In masked peer review, manuscript authors never discover who the reviewers were, so authors never have the opportunity to reward (or punish) reviewers for positive (or negative) reviews.  The mask needs to work only one direction, however: Reviewers will learn the identity of the manuscript author if/when the article is published.

 

Journals seek to have top scientists both for submitting manuscripts to them and for serving on their editorial boards (and often providing the lion’s share of reviews).  Through masked peer review, the same group of experts can serve in both capacities.  This arrangement is routine:  As an example, the following lists the 2010 editorial board for Behavioral Sciences and the Law and lists articles published by those persons 2005–2009.

 

—James Cantor

21 May 2011

 

 

2010 Editorial Board of Behavioral Sciences and the Law

 

Donald Bersoff

*Joseph D. Bloom

*Randy Borum

Joel A. Dvoskin

John F. Edens

Charles Patrick Ewing (Editor)

Robert A. Fein

*Alan R. Felthous (Senior Editor)

Richard I. Frederick

Alan M. Goldstein

*Naomi E. Goldstein

Ezra Griffith

*Thomas Grisso

*Kirk Heilbrun

Jeffrey S. Janofsky

Roy B. Lacoursiere

Roger J. R. Levesque

Murray Levine

Joseph T. McCann

*J. Reid Meloy

*Jeffrey L. Metzner

*James R. P. Ogloff (International Editor)

Randy K. Otto

*Tonia L. Nicholls

Michael L. Perlin

*John Petrila (Co-Editor)

Richard E. Redding

Phillip J. Resnick

Henning Sass (International Editor)

*Robert F. Schopp

*Christopher Slobogin

Jagannathan Srinivasaraghavan (International Editor)

*Daniel W. Shuman

*Matthew S. Stanford

*Pamela J. Taylor (International Editor)

Gina M. Vincent

*Has published one or more articles in Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 2005–2009.

 

 

Publications in Behavioral Science and the Law by its editorial board

 

Barkataki, I., Kumari, V., Das, M., Sumich, A., Taylor, P., & Sharma, T. (2008). Neural correlates of deficient response inhibition in mentally disordered violent individuals. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 51–64.

Berardino, S. D., Meloy, J. R., Sherman, M., & Jacobs, D. (2005). Validation of the psychopathic personality inventory on a female inmate sample. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 819–836.

Borum, R., & Gelles M. (2005). Al-Qaeda's operational evolution: Behavioral and organizational perspectives. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 467–483.

Christy, A., Poythress, N. G., Boothroyd, R. A., Petrila, J., & Mehra, S. (2005). Evaluating the efficiency and community safety goals of the Broward County Mental Health Court. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 227–243.

DeMatteo, D., Heilbrun, K., & Marczyk, G. (2006). An empirical investigation of psychopathy in a noninstitutionalized and noncriminal sample. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 133–146.

Felthous, A. R. (2008). Schizophrenia and impulsive aggression: A heuristic inquiry with forensic and clinical implications. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 735–758.

Kalbeitzer, R., & Goldstein, N. E. (2006). Assessing the “evolving standards of decency”: Perceptions of capital punishment for juveniles. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 157–178.

Kramer, G. M., Wolbransky, M., & Heilbrun, K. (2007). Plea bargaining recommendations by criminal defense attorneys: Evidence strength, potential sentence, and defendant preference. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25, 573–585.

Metzner, J. L. (2009). Monitoring a correctional mental health care system: The role of the mental health expert. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 27, 727–741.

Monahan, J., Steadman, H. J., Appelbaum, P. S., Grisso, T., Mulvey, E. P., Roth, L. H.Silver, E. (2006). The classification of violence risk. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 721–730.

Nicholls, T. L., Ogloff, J. R., Brink, J., & Spidel, A.  (2005). Psychopathy in women: A review of its clinical usefulness for assessing risk for aggression and criminality. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 779–802.

Ogloff, J. R., & Daffern, M. (2006). The dynamic appraisal of situational aggression: An instrument to assess risk for imminent aggression in psychiatric inpatients. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 799–813.

Olley, M. C., Nicholls, T. L., & Brink, J. (2009). Mentally ill individuals in limbo: Obstacles and opportunities for providing psychiatric services to corrections inmates with mental illness. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 27, 811–831.

Schopp, R. F. (2006). Involuntary treatment and competence to proceed in the criminal process: Capital and noncapital cases. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 495–528.

Schopp, R. F. (2009). Treating criminal offenders in correctional contexts: Identifying interests and distributing responsibilities. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 27, 833–855.

Shore, J. H., Bloom, J. D., Manson, S. M., & Whitener, R. J. (2008). Telepsychiatry with rural American Indians: Issues in civil commitments. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 287–300.

Shuman, D. W., & Gold L. H. (2008). Without thinking: Impulsive aggression and criminal responsibility. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 723–734.

Slobogin, C. (2006). Competency in the criminal context: An analysis of Robert Schopp's views. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 529–534.

Stanford, M. S., Houston, R. J., & Baldridge, R. M. (2008). Comparison of impulsive and premeditated perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 709–722.

Steadman, H. J., Redlich, A. D., Griffin, P., Petrila, J., & Monahan, J. (2005). From referral to disposition: Case processing in seven mental health courts. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 215–226.

Taylor, P. J. (2006). Delusional disorder and delusions: Is there a risk of violence in social interactions about the core symptom? Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 313–331.

Taylor, P. J., & Felthous, A. R. (2006). A hypothetical clinical vignette of delusional disorder: How potential legal issues could be addressed in the United Kingdom and the United States. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 369–372.

Taylor, P. J., Hill, J., Bhagwagar, Z., Darjee, R., Thomson, L. D. G. (2008). Presentations of psychosis with violence: Variations in different jurisdictions. A comparison of patients with psychosis in the high security hospitals of Scotland and England. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 585–602.

Warren, L. J., MacKenzie, R., Mullen, P. E., & Ogloff, J. R. (2005). The problem behavior model: The development of a stalkers clinic and a threateners clinic. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 387–397.

Webster, C. D., Nicholls, T. L., Martin, M. L., Desmarais, S. L., Brink, J. (2006). Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START): The case for a new structured professional judgment scheme. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 747–766.

Boldface indicates membership on the editorial board.

 

 

 

The information provided on these pages is for educational purposes only.
It is not intended as clinical or legal advice.  The opinions expressed are those of
James Cantor and do not necessarily reflect those of CAMH or the University of Toronto.

Last updated 22 May 2011