PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Gender DifferencesViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Grants & Awards

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications: A substantive-methodological synergy in support of the null hypothesis model Open PDF 
    (2011)
    Marsh, H.W.
    ;
    Jayasinghe, U.W.
    ;
    Bond, N.W.
    Peer review serves a gatekeeper role, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but is widely criticized in terms of potential biases-particularly in relation to gender. In this substantive-methodological synergy, we demonstrate methodological and multilevel statistical approaches to testing a null hypothesis model in relation to the effect of researcher gender on peer reviews of grant proposals, based on 10,023 reviews by 6233 external assessors of 2331 proposals from social science, humanities, and science disciplines. Utilizing multilevel cross-classified models, we show that support for the null hypothesis model positing researcher gender has no significant effect on proposal outcomes. Furthermore, these non-effects of gender generalize over assessor gender (contrary to a matching hypothesis), discipline, assessors chosen by the researchers themselves compared to those chosen by the funding agency, and country of the assessor. Given the large, diverse sample, the powerful statistical analyses, and support for generalizability, these results - coupled with findings from previous research - offer strong support for the null hypothesis model of no gender differences in peer reviews of grant proposals. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis Open PDF 
    (2007)
    Bornmann, L.
    ;
    Mutz, R.
    ;
    Daniel, H.-D.
    Narrative reviews of peer review research have concluded that there is negligible evidence of gender bias in the awarding of grants based on peer review. Here, we report the findings of a meta-analysis of 21 studies providing, to the contrary, evidence of robust gender differences in grant award procedures. Even though the estimates of the gender effect vary substantially from study to study, the model estimation shows that all in all, among grant applicants men have statistically significant greater odds of receiving grants than women by about 7%. © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.