Dr. James M. Cantor
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 lions 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 20052009.
21 May 2011
2010 Editorial Board of Behavioral Sciences and the Law
*Joseph D. Bloom
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
Jeffrey S. Janofsky
Roy B. Lacoursiere
Roger J. R. Levesque
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
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, 20052009.
Publications in Behavioral Science and the Law by its editorial board
Berardino, S. D., Meloy, J. R.,
Borum, R., & Gelles M. (2005). Al-Qaeda's operational evolution: Behavioral and organizational perspectives. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 467483.
Christy, A., Poythress,
N. G., Boothroyd, R. A., Petrila, J., & Mehra, S. (2005). Evaluating the
efficiency and community safety goals of the
DeMatteo, D., Heilbrun, K., & Marczyk, G. (2006). An empirical investigation of psychopathy in a noninstitutionalized and noncriminal sample. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 133146.
Felthous, A. R. (2008). Schizophrenia and impulsive aggression: A heuristic inquiry with forensic and clinical implications. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 735758.
Kalbeitzer, R., & Goldstein, N. E. (2006). Assessing the evolving standards of decency: Perceptions of capital punishment for juveniles. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 157178.
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, 573585.
Metzner, J. L. (2009). Monitoring a correctional mental health care system: The role of the mental health expert. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 27, 727741.
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, 721730.
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, 779802.
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, 799813.
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, 811831.
Schopp, R. F. (2006). Involuntary treatment and competence to proceed in the criminal process: Capital and noncapital cases. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 495528.
Schopp, R. F. (2009). Treating criminal offenders in correctional contexts: Identifying interests and distributing responsibilities. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 27, 833855.
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, 287300.
Shuman, D. W., & Gold L. H. (2008). Without thinking: Impulsive aggression and criminal responsibility. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26, 723734.
Slobogin, C. (2006). Competency in the criminal context: An analysis of Robert Schopp's views. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 529534.
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, 709722.
Steadman, H. J., Redlich,
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, 313331.
P. J., & Felthous, A. R. (2006).
A hypothetical clinical vignette of delusional disorder: How potential legal
issues could be addressed in the
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, 387397.
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, 747766.
Boldface indicates membership on the editorial board.
The information provided on these pages is for educational
Last updated 22 May 2011