Cargando…
The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions
The growing literature on gender inequality in academia attests to the challenge that awaits female researchers during their academic careers. However, research has not yet conclusively resolved whether these biases persist during the peer review process of research grant funding and whether they im...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532736/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33041361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00626-y |
_version_ | 1783589985692155904 |
---|---|
author | Sato, Sayaka Gygax, Pascal Mark Randall, Julian Schmid Mast, Marianne |
author_facet | Sato, Sayaka Gygax, Pascal Mark Randall, Julian Schmid Mast, Marianne |
author_sort | Sato, Sayaka |
collection | PubMed |
description | The growing literature on gender inequality in academia attests to the challenge that awaits female researchers during their academic careers. However, research has not yet conclusively resolved whether these biases persist during the peer review process of research grant funding and whether they impact respective funding decisions. Whereas many have argued for the existence of gender inequality in grant peer reviews and outcomes, others have demonstrated that gender equality is upheld during these processes. In the present paper, we illustrate how these opinions have come to such opposing conclusions and consider methodological and contextual factors that render these findings inconclusive. More specifically, we argue that a more comprehensive approach is needed to further the debate, encompassing individual and systemic biases as well as more global social barriers. We also argue that examining gender biases during the peer review process of research grant funding poses critical methodological challenges that deserve special attention. We conclude by providing directions for possible future research and more general considerations that may improve grant funding opportunities and career paths for female researchers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7532736 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75327362020-10-05 The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions Sato, Sayaka Gygax, Pascal Mark Randall, Julian Schmid Mast, Marianne High Educ (Dordr) Article The growing literature on gender inequality in academia attests to the challenge that awaits female researchers during their academic careers. However, research has not yet conclusively resolved whether these biases persist during the peer review process of research grant funding and whether they impact respective funding decisions. Whereas many have argued for the existence of gender inequality in grant peer reviews and outcomes, others have demonstrated that gender equality is upheld during these processes. In the present paper, we illustrate how these opinions have come to such opposing conclusions and consider methodological and contextual factors that render these findings inconclusive. More specifically, we argue that a more comprehensive approach is needed to further the debate, encompassing individual and systemic biases as well as more global social barriers. We also argue that examining gender biases during the peer review process of research grant funding poses critical methodological challenges that deserve special attention. We conclude by providing directions for possible future research and more general considerations that may improve grant funding opportunities and career paths for female researchers. Springer Netherlands 2020-10-03 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7532736/ /pubmed/33041361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00626-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Sato, Sayaka Gygax, Pascal Mark Randall, Julian Schmid Mast, Marianne The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
title | The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
title_full | The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
title_fullStr | The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
title_full_unstemmed | The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
title_short | The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
title_sort | leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532736/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33041361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00626-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT satosayaka theleakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT gygaxpascalmark theleakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT randalljulian theleakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT schmidmastmarianne theleakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT satosayaka leakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT gygaxpascalmark leakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT randalljulian leakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections AT schmidmastmarianne leakypipelineinresearchgrantpeerreviewandfundingdecisionschallengesandfuturedirections |