Cargando…

Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution

The productivity and performance of men is generally rated more highly than that of women in controlled experiments, suggesting conscious or unconscious gender biases in assessment. The degree to which editors and reviewers of scholarly journals exhibit gender biases that influence outcomes of the p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fox, Charles W., Paine, C. E. Timothy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6434606/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30962913
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4993
_version_ 1783406505544908800
author Fox, Charles W.
Paine, C. E. Timothy
author_facet Fox, Charles W.
Paine, C. E. Timothy
author_sort Fox, Charles W.
collection PubMed
description The productivity and performance of men is generally rated more highly than that of women in controlled experiments, suggesting conscious or unconscious gender biases in assessment. The degree to which editors and reviewers of scholarly journals exhibit gender biases that influence outcomes of the peer‐review process remains uncertain due to substantial variation among studies. We test whether gender predicts the outcomes of editorial and peer review for >23,000 research manuscripts submitted to six journals in ecology and evolution from 2010 to 2015. Papers with female and male first authors were equally likely to be sent for peer review. However, papers with female first authors obtained, on average, slightly worse peer‐review scores and were more likely to be rejected after peer review, though the difference varied among journals. These gender differences appear to be partly due to differences in authorial roles. Papers for the which the first author deferred corresponding authorship to a coauthor (which women do more often than men) obtained significantly worse peer‐review scores and were less likely to get positive editorial decisions. Gender differences in corresponding authorship explained some of the gender differences in peer‐review scores and positive editorial decisions. In contrast to these observations on submitted manuscripts, gender differences in peer‐review outcomes were observed in a survey of >12,000 published manuscripts; women reported similar rates of rejection (from a prior journal) before eventual publication. After publication, papers with female authors were cited less often than those with male authors, though the differences are very small (~2%). Our data do not allow us to test hypotheses about mechanisms underlying the gender discrepancies we observed, but strongly support the conclusion that papers authored by women have lower acceptance rates and are less well cited than are papers authored by men in ecology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6434606
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64346062019-04-08 Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution Fox, Charles W. Paine, C. E. Timothy Ecol Evol Original Research The productivity and performance of men is generally rated more highly than that of women in controlled experiments, suggesting conscious or unconscious gender biases in assessment. The degree to which editors and reviewers of scholarly journals exhibit gender biases that influence outcomes of the peer‐review process remains uncertain due to substantial variation among studies. We test whether gender predicts the outcomes of editorial and peer review for >23,000 research manuscripts submitted to six journals in ecology and evolution from 2010 to 2015. Papers with female and male first authors were equally likely to be sent for peer review. However, papers with female first authors obtained, on average, slightly worse peer‐review scores and were more likely to be rejected after peer review, though the difference varied among journals. These gender differences appear to be partly due to differences in authorial roles. Papers for the which the first author deferred corresponding authorship to a coauthor (which women do more often than men) obtained significantly worse peer‐review scores and were less likely to get positive editorial decisions. Gender differences in corresponding authorship explained some of the gender differences in peer‐review scores and positive editorial decisions. In contrast to these observations on submitted manuscripts, gender differences in peer‐review outcomes were observed in a survey of >12,000 published manuscripts; women reported similar rates of rejection (from a prior journal) before eventual publication. After publication, papers with female authors were cited less often than those with male authors, though the differences are very small (~2%). Our data do not allow us to test hypotheses about mechanisms underlying the gender discrepancies we observed, but strongly support the conclusion that papers authored by women have lower acceptance rates and are less well cited than are papers authored by men in ecology. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6434606/ /pubmed/30962913 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4993 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Fox, Charles W.
Paine, C. E. Timothy
Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
title Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
title_full Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
title_fullStr Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
title_full_unstemmed Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
title_short Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
title_sort gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6434606/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30962913
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4993
work_keys_str_mv AT foxcharlesw genderdifferencesinpeerreviewoutcomesandmanuscriptimpactatsixjournalsofecologyandevolution
AT painecetimothy genderdifferencesinpeerreviewoutcomesandmanuscriptimpactatsixjournalsofecologyandevolution