scholarly journals Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. eabd0299
Author(s):  
Flaminio Squazzoni ◽  
Giangiacomo Bravo ◽  
Mike Farjam ◽  
Ana Marusic ◽  
Bahar Mehmani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Publication Rates ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Editorial Decisions ◽  
Selection Of

Scholarly journals are often blamed for a gender gap in publication rates, but it is unclear whether peer review and editorial processes contribute to it. This article examines gender bias in peer review with data for 145 journals in various fields of research, including about 1.7 million authors and 740,000 referees. We reconstructed three possible sources of bias, i.e., the editorial selection of referees, referee recommendations, and editorial decisions, and examined all their possible relationships. Results showed that manuscripts written by women as solo authors or coauthored by women were treated even more favorably by referees and editors. Although there were some differences between fields of research, our findings suggest that peer review and editorial processes do not penalize manuscripts by women. However, increasing gender diversity in editorial teams and referee pools could help journals inform potential authors about their attention to these factors and so stimulate participation by women.

scholarly journals No evidence of any systematic bias against manuscripts by women in the peer review process of 145 scholarly journals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flaminio Squazzoni ◽  
Giangiacomo Bravo ◽  
Pierpaolo Dondio ◽  
Mike Farjam ◽  
Ana Marusic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Systematic Bias ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Social Nature ◽  
Editorial Decisions ◽  
Selection Of

This article examines gender bias in peer review with complete data on 145 journals in various fields of research, including about 1.7 million authors and 740,000 referees. We reconstructed three possible sources of bias, i.e., the editorial selection of referees, referee recommendations, and editorial decisions, and examined all their possible relationships. In line with previous research, we found that editors were sensitive to gender homophily in that they tended to match authors and referee by gender systematically. Results showed that in general manuscripts written by women as solo authors or co-authored by women are treated even more favorably by referees and editors. This is especially so in biomedicine and health journals, whereas women were treated relatively less favorably in social science & humanities journals, i.e., the field in which the ratio of female authors was the highest in our sample. Although with some caveat, our findings suggest that peer review and editorial processes in scholarly journals do not penalize manuscripts by women. However, considering the complex social nature of gender prejudices, journals should increase gender diversity among reviewers and editors as a means of correcting signals potentially biasing the perceptions of authors and referees.

scholarly journals Campaigning on the welfare state: The impact of gender and gender diversity

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Election Campaigns ◽  
Female Representation ◽  
Press Releases ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Welfare State

Social policy matters have long been considered women’s issues. Extant research has documented a strong link between gender and the policies of the welfare state in the legislative, executive and electoral arenas. Yet what determines the strength of this association has largely been left unexplored. Drawing on tokenism theory, this article proposes gender diversity at the group level as a key explanatory factor. It hypothesizes that the gender gap in social policy diminishes as the female representation in a political party increases. To test this argument, it examines almost 8000 press releases issued by over 600 politicians during four election campaigns in Austria between 2002 and 2013. The analysis demonstrates that women talk more about social policy issues during election campaigns than men, but that this emphasis gap disappears for parties with a more equal gender balance. These results have important implications for our understanding of the politics of gender and social policy.

Addressing Cultural and Gender Project Bias

2018 ◽  
pp. 1605-1623
Author(s):  
Jennifer Loy ◽  
Rae Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Minority Students ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Project Work ◽  
Student Body ◽  
Diverse Student Body ◽  
Diverse Student ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Selection Of

Engaged student learning is based on creating significant learning experiences for every student. Attracting a more diverse student body into Engineering requires a re-evaluation of the conventional project topics that dominate the discipline. Recognising and addressing cultural and gender bias in the development of project work allows for the education of Engineering faculty on the development of a range of project work opportunities that support the learning for a more diverse cohort. The selection of set project work has the potential to negatively impact the learning experience of minority students. This chapter considers the elements influencing set project work and provides strategies for understanding cultural and gender bias, and for redesigning project work that provides for a more diverse cohort.

scholarly journals Explaining Gender in the Journals: How Submission Practices Affect Publication Patterns in Political Science

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul A. Djupe ◽  
Amy Erica Smith ◽  
Anand Edward Sokhey
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Publication Rates ◽  
Publication Patterns ◽  
Original Survey ◽  
Political Science Journals ◽  
Selection Of

ABSTRACTIn recent work, Teele and Thelen (2017) documented the underrepresentation of female-authored scholarship in a broad selection of political science journals. To better understand these patterns, we present the results of an original, individual-level survey of political scientists conducted in the spring of 2017. Confirming Teele and Thelen’s speculation, our evidence indicates that differences in submission rates underlie the gender gap in publication—a pattern particularly pronounced for the discipline’s “top three” journals. Leveraging original survey items, we pursue explanations of the submission gap, finding that both methodological specialization and attitudes toward publication strategies play roles. Importantly, we also conclude that men and women obtain differential returns on their investments in coauthorship: although male and female respondents report identical propensities to coauthor, coauthorship boosts submission and publication rates more strongly for men than women. We discuss the implications of our findings for ongoing conversations about inequality in political science.

scholarly journals The gender imbalance in academic medicine: a study of female authorship in the United Kingdom

2009 ◽  
Vol 102 (8) ◽  
pp. 337-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reena Sidhu ◽  
Praveen Rajashekhar ◽  
Victoria L Lavin ◽  
Joanne Parry ◽  
James Attwood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
British Journal ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Publication Rates ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Engineering And Technology ◽  
Female Authorship ◽  
And Gender

Summary Objectives A shortfall exists of female doctors in senior academic posts in the United Kingdom. Career progression depends on measures of esteem, including publication in prestigious journals. This study investigates gender differences in first and senior authorship in six peer-reviewed British journals and factors that are associated with publication rates. Design and main outcome measures Data was collected on United Kingdom first and senior authors who had published in the British Medical Journal, Lancet, British Journal of Surgery, Gut, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and the Archives of Diseases in Childhood. Authorship and gender were quantified for 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2004 ( n=6457). In addition, selected questions from the Athena Survey of Science Engineering and Technology (ASSET2006), web-based doctor's self-report of publications were also analysed ( n=1162). Results Female first authors increased from 10.5% in 1970 to 36.5% in 2004 (p<0.001) while female senior authors only increased from 12.3% to 16.5% (p=0.046). Within individual journals, the largest rise was in British Journal of Obstetric and Gynaecology with 4.5- and 3-fold increases for first and senior authors, respectively. In contrast, female senior authors marginally declined in Gut and Lancet by 2.8% and 2.2%, respectively. ASSET2006 identified that female respondents who were parents were less likely to have publications as sole (p=0.02) and joint authors (p<0.001) compared to male respondents. Female respondents with care responsibilities for parents/partner also had less publications as lead authors compared to those without carer responsibilities (p<0.001). Conclusion The increase in UK female first authors is encouraging. In contrast, there is considerable lag and in some specialties a decline in female senior authors. Factors that could narrow the gender gap in authorship should be sought and addressed.

How Gendered Is the Peer-Review Process? A Mixed-Design Analysis of Reviewer Feedback

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Thomas König ◽  
Guido Ropers
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
Mixed Design ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
American Political Science

ABSTRACT A fair peer-review process is essential for the integrity of a discipline’s scholarly standards. However, underrepresentation of scholarly groups casts doubt on fairness, which currently is raising concerns about a gender bias in the peer-review process of premier scholarly journals such as the American Political Science Review (APSR). This study examines gender differences in APSR reviewing during the period 2007–2020. Our explorative analysis suggests that male reviewers privilege male authors and female reviewers privilege female authors, whereas manuscripts reviewed by both male and female reviewers indicate less gender bias. Using within-manuscript variation to address confounding effects, we then show that manuscripts reviewed by both male and female reviewers receive a more positive evaluation by female reviewers in terms of recommendation and sentiment, but they experience a marginally longer duration. Because these effects are not specific for type of authorship, we recommend that invitations to review should reflect mixed compositions of peers, which also may avoid overburdening an underrepresented group with review workload.

scholarly journals Gender diversity of editorial boards and gender differences in the peer review process at six journals of ecology and evolution

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (24) ◽  
pp. 13636-13649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles W. Fox ◽  
Meghan A. Duffy ◽  
Daphne J. Fairbairn ◽  
Jennifer A. Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Editorial Boards ◽  
And Gender

scholarly journals Addressing Cultural and Gender Project Bias

2017 ◽  
pp. 130-154
Author(s):  
Jennifer Loy ◽  
Rae Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Minority Students ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Project Work ◽  
Student Body ◽  
Diverse Student Body ◽  
Diverse Student ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Selection Of

Engaged student learning is based on creating significant learning experiences for every student. Attracting a more diverse student body into Engineering requires a re-evaluation of the conventional project topics that dominate the discipline. Recognising and addressing cultural and gender bias in the development of project work allows for the education of Engineering faculty on the development of a range of project work opportunities that support the learning for a more diverse cohort. The selection of set project work has the potential to negatively impact the learning experience of minority students. This chapter considers the elements influencing set project work and provides strategies for understanding cultural and gender bias, and for redesigning project work that provides for a more diverse cohort.

scholarly journals Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: a meta-analytical review

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 181566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Astegiano ◽  
Esther Sebastián-González ◽  
Camila de Toledo Castanho
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Research Fields ◽  
And Gender ◽  
New Policies ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Gender Productivity Gap ◽  
Productivity Gap

Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers' work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men's success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men's articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science.

scholarly journals A Gender integrative conceptualization of entrepreneurship

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Clark Muntean ◽  
Banu Ozkazanc-Pan
Keyword(s):  
Gender Bias ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Women Entrepreneurs ◽  
Influential Factors ◽  
Structural Barriers ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystem ◽  
Promote Gender Equality ◽  
Feminist Perspectives ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Entrepreneurial Activities

Guided by feminist perspectives, we critique existing approaches to the study of womenʼs entrepreneurship on epistemological grounds and suggest that the entrepreneurship field needs to recognize gendered assumptions in theorizing. Deploying a feminist framework, we suggest that understanding the “gender gap” in entrepreneurship requires focus on institutional and structural barriers women entrepreneurs face. Existing studies of women entrepreneurs often compare women with men without considering how gender and gender relations impact the very concepts and ideas of entrepreneurship. We propose, therefore, a conceptualization of entrepreneurship that illuminates gender bias and calls attention to the interrelated individual, institutional, and structural barriers in the entrepreneurial process that arrive out of societal and cultural gender norms. Through praxis or engaged practice, we redirect scholarship in the entrepreneurship field, while proposing ways that can promote gender equality in entrepreneurial activities. In all, our gender integrative conceptualization of entrepreneurship contributes to the entrepreneurship field by recognizing and addressing a more expansive realm of influential factors within the entrepreneurial ecosystem that have previously been researched separately.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document