Dansk Center for Forskningsanalyse

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

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

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.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummere64561
TidsskrifteLife
Vol/bind10
Antal sider13
ISSN2050-084X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - mar. 2021

Bibliografisk note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, Nielsen et al.

Copyright:
This record is sourced from MEDLINE/PubMed, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

Projekter

ID: 215268895