  Double-blind review relies on the authors' ability and willingness to
effectively anonymize their submissions. We explore anonymization effectiveness
at ASE 2016, OOPSLA 2016, and PLDI 2016 by asking reviewers if they can guess
author identities. We find that 74%-90% of reviews contain no correct guess and
that reviewers who self-identify as experts on a paper's topic are more likely
to attempt to guess, but no more likely to guess correctly. We present our
findings, summarize the PC chairs' comments about administering double-blind
review, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of revealing author identities
part of the way through the process, and conclude by advocating for the
continued use of double-blind review.
