Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM
Published 2019 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
PeerJ
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages e8247
Publisher
PeerJ
Online
2019-12-12
DOI
10.7717/peerj.8247
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution
- (2019) Charles W. Fox et al. Ecology and Evolution
- Are gender gaps due to evaluations of the applicant or the science? A natural experiment at a national funding agency
- (2019) Holly O Witteman et al. LANCET
- Male principal investigators (almost) don’t publish with women in ecology and zoology
- (2019) Patricia E. Salerno et al. PLoS One
- brms: An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan
- (2017) Paul-Christian Bürkner Journal of Statistical Software
- Journals invite too few women to referee
- (2017) Jory Lerback et al. NATURE
- Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?
- (2017) Rafael D’Andrea et al. PLoS One
- Gender bias in scholarly peer review
- (2017) Markus Helmer et al. eLife
- Editor and reviewer gender influence the peer review process but not peer review outcomes at an ecology journal
- (2015) Charles W. Fox et al. FUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY
- Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines
- (2015) S.-J. Leslie et al. SCIENCE
- Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors
- (2015) David B. Resnik et al. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
- Use of double-blind peer review to increase author diversity
- (2014) E. S. Darling CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
- Threats to objectivity in peer review: the case of gender
- (2014) Anna Kaatz et al. TRENDS IN PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES
- Women are underrepresented on the editorial boards of journals in environmental biology and natural resource management
- (2014) Alyssa H. Cho et al. PeerJ
- Bias in peer review
- (2012) Carole J. Lee et al. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
- Is publication rate an equal opportunity metric?
- (2012) Elissa Z. Cameron et al. TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
- Cooperation between Referees and Authors Increases Peer Review Accuracy
- (2011) Jeffrey T. Leek et al. PLoS One
- Transparency showcases strength of peer review
- (2010) Bernd Pulverer NATURE
- Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study
- (2008) David B. Resnik et al. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
- Does double-blind review benefit female authors?
- (2008) Thomas J. Webb et al. TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
- Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors
- (2007) A BUDDEN et al. TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
Find Funding. Review Successful Grants.
Explore over 25,000 new funding opportunities and over 6,000,000 successful grants.
ExploreAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started