This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Can We Test for Bias in Scientific Peer-Review?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Oswald, Andrew J. () (University of Warwick)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Science rests upon the reliability of peer review. This paper suggests a way to test for bias. It is able to avoid the fallacy – one seen in the popular press and the research literature – that to measure discrimination it is sufficient to study averages within two populations. The paper’s contribution is primarily methodological, but I apply it, as an illustration, to data from the field of economics. No scientific bias or favoritism is found (although the Journal of Political Economy discriminates against its own Chicago authors). The test’s methodology is applicable in most scholarly disciplines.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://ftp.iza.org/dp3665.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in its series IZA Discussion Papers with number 3665.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 27 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp3665

Contact details of provider:
Postal: IZA, P.O. Box 7240, D-53072 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49 228 3894 223
Fax: +49 228 3894 180
Web page: http://www.iza.org

Order Information:
Postal: IZA, Margard Ody, P.O. Box 7240, D-53072 Bonn, Germany
Email:

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Mark Fallak).

Related research
Keywords: discrimination; citations; science; peer-review system;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H8 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

This item is featured on the following reading lists:
  1. Economic Logic blog
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Claudia Goldin & Cecilia Rouse, 2000. "Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of "Blind" Auditions on Female Musicians," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 715-741, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Stephen Wu, 2007. "Recent publishing trends at the AER, JPE and QJE," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 59-63, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Andrew J. Oswald, 2007. "An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-Makers," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(293), pages 21-31, 02. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  4. Wolfers, Justin, 2006. "Diagnosing Discrimination: Stock Returns and CEO Gender," CEPR Discussion Papers 5507, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  5. Amanda Goodall, 2005. "Should Research Universities be led by top researchers? Part 1: Are they?," CEE Discussion Papers 0051, Centre for the Economics of Education, LSE. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  6. Tom Coupé & Victor Ginsburgh & Abdul Noury, 2008. "Are leading papers of better quality? Evidence from a natural experiment," Discussion Papers 9, Kyiv School of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  7. Laband, David N & Tollison, Robert D & Karahan, Gokhan R, 2002. "Quality Control in Economics," Kyklos, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 55(3), pages 315-34.
  8. Shamena Anwar & Hanming Fang, 2006. "An Alternative Test of Racial Prejudice in Motor Vehicle Searches: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 127-151, March. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  9. Liran Einav & Leeat Yariv, 2006. "What's in a Surname? The Effects of Surname Initials on Academic Success," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 175-188, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. J. Peter Neary & James A. Mirrlees & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Evaluating Economics Research in Europe: An Introduction," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1239-1249, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Frey, Bruno S, 2003. " Publishing as Prostitution?--Choosing between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 116(1-2), pages 205-23, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2002. "International Labor Economics," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(4), pages 709-732, October. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  13. Timothy Clark & Mike Wright, 2007. "Reviewing Journal Rankings and Revisiting Peer Reviews: Editorial Perspectives," Journal of Management Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(4), pages 612-621, 06. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. JS Armstrong, 2004. "Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation," General Economics and Teaching 0412027, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
  15. Mirjam van Praag & Bernard M.S. van Praag, 2007. "The Benefits of Being Economics Professor A (and not Z)," CESifo Working Paper Series CESifo Working Paper No. , CESifo Group Munich. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  16. Daniel S. Hamermesh & Peter Schmidt, 2003. "The Determinants of Econometric Society Fellows Elections," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 399-407, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Glenn Ellison, 2007. "Is Peer Review in Decline?," NBER Working Papers 13272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. Scott Smart & Joel Waldfogel, 1996. "A Citation-Based Test for Discrimination at Economics and Finance Journals," NBER Working Papers 5460, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Cardoso, Ana Rute & Guimaraes, Paulo & Zimmermann, Klaus F., 2008. "Comparing the Early Research Performance of PhD Graduates in Labor Economics in Europe and the USA," IZA Discussion Papers 3898, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? It is the publishers that input data about their publications, as there is no staff at RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-9.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.