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

被引:97
|
作者
Squazzoni, Flaminio [1 ]
Bravo, Giangiacomo [2 ,3 ]
Farjam, Mike [3 ,4 ]
Marusic, Ana [5 ]
Mehmani, Bahar [6 ]
Willis, Michael [7 ]
Birukou, Aliaksandr [8 ]
Dondio, Pierpaolo [9 ]
Grimaldo, Francisco [10 ]
机构
[1] Univ Milan, Dept Social & Polit Sci, Milan, Italy
[2] Linnaeus Univ, Dept Social Studies, Vaxjo, Sweden
[3] Linnaeus Univ, Ctr Data Intens Sci & Applicat, Vaxjo, Sweden
[4] Linnaeus Univ, Dept Comp Sci & Media Technol, Vaxjo, Sweden
[5] Univ Split, Sch Med, Split, Croatia
[6] Elsevier, STM Journals, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[7] John Wiley & Sons, Oxford, England
[8] Springer Nat, Heidelberg, Germany
[9] Technol Univ Dublin, Sch Comp Sci, Dublin, Ireland
[10] Univ Valencia, Dept Comp Sci, Burjassot, Spain
关键词
PUBLICATION PATTERNS; POLITICAL-SCIENCE; OUTCOMES; WOMEN; PRODUCTIVITY; ECOLOGY; IMPACT; GAP;
D O I
10.1126/sciadv.abd0299
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条