Reputation, gender or perceived power of the author may positively affect the acceptance of the paper. Double or triple blind-reviews were imposed to reduce this bias. However a high degree of specialisation in modern science does very little to preserve anonymity. Pre-publications, citations of author's previous work, and tight professional circles allow reviewers to easily guess author's identity. In one of the studies 46% of reviewers were able to correctly identify masked authors (Fisher 1994). Although effects of this guessing game have not been extensively studied, it can contribute to broad ambivalence towards double-blind peer review in science.