日本語
 
Help Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細


公開

学術論文

Gender bias in scholarly peer review

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons220435

Helmer,  Markus
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons195079

Schottdorf,  Manuel
Research Group Theoretical Neurophysics, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons173448

Neef,  Andreas
Research Group Theoretical Neurophysics, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
There are no locators available
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
フルテキスト (公開)
公開されているフルテキストはありません
付随資料 (公開)
There is no public supplementary material available
引用

Helmer, M., Schottdorf, M., Neef, A., & Battaglia, D. (2017). Gender bias in scholarly peer review. eLife, 6:. doi:10.7554/eLife.21718.


引用: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-002D-0ABF-B
要旨
Peer 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.