IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v459y2009i7246d10.1038_nj7246-602a.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do women have less success in peer review?

Author

Listed:
  • Herbert Marsh

    (Herbert Marsh is a professor of education at the University of Oxford, UK)

  • Lutz Bornmann

    (Lutz Bornmann is a PhD student at the ETH University in Zurich, Switzerland.)

Abstract

An extensive collaborative analysis concludes that the perception is unwarranted, say Herbert Marsh and Lutz Bornmann.

Suggested Citation

  • Herbert Marsh & Lutz Bornmann, 2009. "Do women have less success in peer review?," Nature, Nature, vol. 459(7246), pages 602-602, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:459:y:2009:i:7246:d:10.1038_nj7246-602a
    DOI: 10.1038/nj7246-602a
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/nj7246-602a
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/nj7246-602a?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elsa Addessi & Marta Borgi & Elisabetta Palagi, 2012. "Is Primatology an Equal-Opportunity Discipline?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(1), pages 1-6, January.
    2. Benda, Wim G.G. & Engels, Tim C.E., 2011. "The predictive validity of peer review: A selective review of the judgmental forecasting qualities of peers, and implications for innovation in science," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 166-182.
    3. Marsh, Herbert W. & Jayasinghe, Upali W. & Bond, Nigel W., 2011. "Gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications: A substantive-methodological synergy in support of the null hypothesis model," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 167-180.
    4. van den Besselaar, Peter, 2012. "Selection committee membership: Service or self-service," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 580-585.
    5. Benda, Wim G.G. & Engels, Tim C.E., 2011. "The predictive validity of peer review: A selective review of the judgmental forecasting qualities of peers, and implications for innovation in science," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 166-182, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:459:y:2009:i:7246:d:10.1038_nj7246-602a. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.