Zur Kurzanzeige

Gender bias in scholarly peer review

dc.contributor.authorHelmer, Markus
dc.contributor.authorSchottdorf, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorNeef, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorBattaglia, Demian
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-25T15:08:33Z
dc.date.available2017-04-25T15:08:33Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.relation.ISSN2050-084Xen
dc.identifier.urihttp://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14417
dc.description.abstractPeer review is the cornerstone of scholarly publishing and it is essential that peer reviewers are appointed on the basis of their expertise alone. However, it is difficult to check for any bias in the peer-review process because the identity of peer reviewers generally remains confidential. Here, using public information about the identities of 9000 editors and 43000 reviewers from the Frontiers series of journals, we show that women are underrepresented in the peer-review process, that editors of both genders operate with substantial same-gender preference (homophily), and that the mechanisms of this homophily are gender-dependent. We also show that homophily will persist even if numerical parity between genders is reached, highlighting the need for increased efforts to combat subtler forms of gender bias in scholarly publishing.en
dc.language.isoengen
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/330792/EU/Dynamic effective connectivity of the Virtual Brain/DynViBen
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
dc.subjectGender bias; scholarly peer reviewen
dc.titleGender bias in scholarly peer reviewen
dc.typejournalArticle
dc.identifier.doi10.7554/eLife.21718
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume6en
dc.type.subtypejournalArticle
dc.identifier.pmid28322725
dc.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber21718en
dc.description.statuspeerRevieweden
dc.bibliographicCitation.journaleLifeen


Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Thumbnail

Das Dokument erscheint in:

Zur Kurzanzeige

Nutzungslizenz für diese Dokumente:
openAccess