...To test whether this is true, a team at the University of Toronto led by Amber Budden looked at the journal Behavioral Ecology, which switched to a double-blind peer-review process in 2001. The study found that 8% more female authors had papers published once authors' identities were hidden. Dr. Budden believes the findings should spur a debate about adopting anonymous review policies in scientific fields.
Sounds like a good start. Is the 8% statistically significant, though? And the one journal? But I'm all for it, especially since my status happens to be female and (hopefully!) publishing papers in the future.