Back to Search Start Over

Weak evidence of country- and institution-related status bias in the peer review of abstracts

Authors :
Mathias Wullum Nielsen
Michael Bang Petersen
Jens Peter Andersen
Emer Brady
Christine Friis Baker
Source :
eLife, Vol 10 (2021), Nielsen, M W, Baker, C F, Brady, E, Petersen, M B & Andersen, J P 2021, ' Weak evidence of country-and institution-related status bias in the peer review of abstracts ', eLife, vol. 10, e64561 . https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64561, eLife
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
eLife Sciences Publications Ltd, 2021.

Abstract

Research suggests that scientists based at prestigious institutions receive more credit for their work than scientists based at less prestigious institutions, as do scientists working in certain countries. We examined the extent to which country- and institution-related status signals drive such differences in scientific recognition. In a preregistered survey experiment, we asked 4,147 scientists from six disciplines (astronomy, cardiology, materials science, political science, psychology and public health) to rate abstracts that varied on two factors: (i) author country (high status vs lower status in science); (ii) author institution (high status vs lower status university). We found only weak evidence of country- or institution-related status bias, and mixed regression models with discipline as random-effect parameter indicated that any plausible bias not detected by our study must be small in size.

Details

Language :
English
Volume :
10
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
eLife
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....de69870b834432b3f0ce4d0e72449254
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64561