Hi there. I try to follow the efforts of Tudor_Queen to open some discussion for those interested.

Recently it has happened to me to write an article. There were 2 main journals I could submit my paper to. One more fitting with the article's content but with no blind-review while the other less fitting but blinded. I have chosen the latter on the idea of scientific moral integrity.

Indeed I was impressed by this article

The second interviewed researcher named Eva, says that the most important thing she pays attention when accepting or denying a review is indeed the scientific moral integrity. Do you think should researcher prioritize blind-reviewed journals?

This is a little off-topic but still of interest to many PhD and postdocs I guess.

I think I that I would think that is important. I wasn't actually aware that some journals didn't include blind reviewers. I am so little known in my field though that it would hardly matter. Another thing is - apparently you can often guess whose work it is anyway - if you're fairly familiar with the topic/area.