Gender bias in scholarly peer review
Publication type
journal article
Publication date
2017
Author(s)
Helmer, Markus
Schottdorf, Manuel
Neef, Andreas
Battaglia, Demian
Editor(s)
Rodgers, Peter
Source
Language
English
View point(s)
Peer Review System
Abstract
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.
Journal
eLife
ISSN
2050-084X
Volume
6
Pagination
e21718