This is a very positive move! The blind review process is in the need for an overhaul. I have also been a reviewer (unpaid) and I realised that it was a futile exercise unless you really want to climb up the publishing career. It is usually a colossal waste of the Post-docs to be seen as “editors” whereas they should be in the labs doing what they were trained for!
Nevertheless, this development is welcome reprieve from the “nasty comments” which usually accompany the returned article. I am sure, most of the readers would have their own stories. (emphasis mine)
Along with many journals, we have begun to open up the peer-review process. Four years ago, Nature invited referees to be acknowledged in papers — with the consent of both author and reviewer. Around 3,700 Nature referees have chosen to be publicly recognized, and around 80% of the journal’s papers have at least one referee named.Beginning this week, authors of new submissions to Nature will be offered the option to have anonymous referee reports published, along with their own responses and rebuttals, once a manuscript is ready for publication.Those who agree to act as reviewers should know that their anonymous reports — and their anonymized correspondence with authors — might be published. Referees can also choose to be named, should they desire.Nature will publish peer review reports as a trial