Discrimination in Scientific Review: A Natural Field Experiment on Blind Versus Non‐Blind Reviews

F. Carlsson, Åsa Löfgren, T. Sterner
{"title":"Discrimination in Scientific Review: A Natural Field Experiment on Blind Versus Non‐Blind Reviews","authors":"F. Carlsson, Åsa Löfgren, T. Sterner","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9442.2011.01690.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using papers submitted to an international conference on economics held in Sweden in 2008, we analyze how gender, as well as other characteristics of the authors and reviewers, affects the grading of these papers by the reviewers. Correcting for other variables, including the country and research field, as well as the academic level of the author, we focus on the difference in grades between blind and non-blind review treatments. We find that non-blind reviewing has little effect, and there is no significant evidence of gender discrimination. Furthermore, we do not find any significant difference between the average grading by female and male reviewers.","PeriodicalId":11754,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Macroeconomics: Aggregative Models (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Macroeconomics: Aggregative Models (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9442.2011.01690.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Using papers submitted to an international conference on economics held in Sweden in 2008, we analyze how gender, as well as other characteristics of the authors and reviewers, affects the grading of these papers by the reviewers. Correcting for other variables, including the country and research field, as well as the academic level of the author, we focus on the difference in grades between blind and non-blind review treatments. We find that non-blind reviewing has little effect, and there is no significant evidence of gender discrimination. Furthermore, we do not find any significant difference between the average grading by female and male reviewers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科学评论中的歧视:盲评与非盲评的自然现场实验
我们利用2008年在瑞典举行的一次国际经济学会议上提交的论文,分析了性别以及作者和审稿人的其他特征如何影响审稿人对这些论文的评分。校正其他变量,包括国家和研究领域,以及作者的学术水平,我们专注于盲评和非盲评之间的评分差异。研究发现,非盲评效果不明显,且不存在显著的性别歧视。此外,我们没有发现女性和男性审稿人的平均评分有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Economic Hysteresis and its Modeling Credit Horizons Estimation of Heuristic Switching in Behavioral Macroeconomic Models Coupled Climate-Economy-Ecology (CoCEB) Modeling: A Dynamic Approach Post Keynesian Economics Is Based on Joan Robinson’s Many Canards About Supposed Gaping Holes in Keynes’s Theory: The Real Problem Is Gaping Holes and Gross Ignorance in the Post Keynesian Understanding of Keynes’s a Treatise on Probability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1