Blind submissions in Dapple hide a creator's identity from reviewers so they assess the work on its own merits. By default, reviewers already can't see Creator Profiles — name, email, photo, tags, or submission history. To run a fully blind process you also hide any identifying form fields and remind creators to anonymise their attachments. Set this up once per project and you're done.
What information is automatically hidden from reviewers in a blind submission?
When you use Dapple Reviews, the entire Creator Profile is hidden from reviewers automatically. That includes:
Name
Email address
Profile photo
Creator tags
Previous submission history
Reviewers see only the submitted form fields and any attachments — nothing about the creator themselves. This default protection is on for every Review Panel, every time.
Information | Hidden from reviewers? | Notes |
Creator name | Yes | Not shown at any point during review |
Creator email | Yes | Not shown at any point during review |
Creator profile / bio | Yes | Not shown at any point during review |
Submission title | No needs to be hidden | Titles remain visible — avoid including names in titles if full anonymity is needed |
Submission content (files, text) | No | Full content is visible — redact manually if content contains identifying information |
Submission tags | No | Tags are only visible in the admin and not to reviewers |
Submission ID | Yes — partially | A reference number is shown instead of the creator's name |
Blind review hides creator identity at the platform level. It does not redact content within uploaded files. If a creator has included their name in a document or image, reviewers will still see it. Brief your creators to omit personal details from submitted materials if full anonymity is required
Why run blind submissions?
Blind review reduces conscious and unconscious bias. Reviewers can't be influenced by a creator's name, institution, demographic, or previous work — only by what's in front of them. For competitive open calls, juried awards, or anything where fairness is a public commitment, blind review is the strongest signal you can give that your process is impartial.
Step 1: Hide identifying form fields
Even with the Creator Profile hidden, your form might still ask for identifying info (name, address, demographics). Hide those fields from reviewers:
Open Form Builder for the project.
Click the field you want to hide and select Edit.
Open the Advanced tab.
Tick Hide from reviewers.
Save.
You can make a field hidden at any point even if it has already been sent to a review panel. Head into the form, hide the field and then make sure to publishe the latest form version. It will then automatically be hidden from any review panels.
Full detail: How to Hide Fields From Review Panels
Step 2: Tell creators to anonymise their attachments
A blind setup falls apart if creators put their name in the document header, footer, or file name. Add a short reminder to your submission form description or guidelines asking creators to:
Remove their name, email, and other personal details from any attachments (headers, footers, file names).
Avoid self-references in the work — e.g. 'as the author of X' is a giveaway.
Step 3: Test your setup before going live
Before opening the project, run a quick test pass:
Preview your submission form as a creator and complete a test submission.
View the test submission as a reviewer — confirm hidden fields are hidden.
Check that no identifying info leaks through attachments or the form.
Step 4: Communicate clearly with reviewers
Tell your panel explicitly that this is a blind review. Reinforce that they shouldn't try to identify the creator, and that they should evaluate work on its content alone. Including this in your Review Guidance text helps anchor it on every feedback form.
Step 5: Keep identities hidden until results are final
Once the decision process is complete, admins can reveal creator identities — for example to announce winners or contact selected creators. Until then, keep identifying information restricted to admins only.
What are the caveats of blind review?
Caveat | What to do about it |
Creator names in uploaded files | Brief creators to remove personal details from submitted documents before uploading |
Submission titles containing names | Ask creators to use a neutral title format (e.g. a project title rather than their own name) |
Admin members can see full results | Admin members have elevated access — assign this role only to team members who should see unblinded data |
Blind review doesn't apply retroactively to downloaded files | Any files downloaded before blind review was enabled may contain identity data |
Reviewers who know the creator personally | Platform anonymisation can't prevent recognition — consider this when building your panel |
Best practices
Enable blind review before opening your project to submissions — it's cleanest to set up the full review configuration in advance.
Include a note in your submission guidelines asking creators to avoid including personal information in their submitted materials.
Test the reviewer view in an incognito window before your panel starts — a five-minute check prevents a credibility issue mid-process.
If you have admin members, remind them of their elevated visibility and the responsibility that comes with it.
Combine blind review with a structured scoring rubric — anonymisation works best when paired with objective, criteria-based scoring.
Where to go next