TY - JOUR
T1 - Peer review and gender bias:
T2 - A study on 145 scholarly journals
AU - Squazzoni, Flaminio
AU - Bravo, Giangiacomo
AU - Farjam, Mike
AU - Marusic, Ana
AU - Mehmani, Bahar
AU - Willis, Michael
AU - Birukou, Aliaksandr
AU - Dondio, Pierpaolo
AU - Grimaldo, Francisco
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
U2 - 10.1126/sciadv.abd0299
DO - 10.1126/sciadv.abd0299
M3 - Article
C2 - 33523967
SN - 2375-2548
VL - 7
SP - eabd0299
JO - Science Advances
JF - Science Advances
IS - 2
ER -