Reviewer Practices in Ecology and Evolution
Author Information
Author(s): Grod Olyana N., Budden Amber E., Tregenza Tom, Koricheva Julia, Leimu Roosa, Aarssen Lonnie W., Lortie Christopher J.
Primary Institution: York University
Hypothesis
Gender, status, and region are important determinants of referee performance in ecology and evolution.
Conclusion
Males reviewed more manuscripts and recommended rejection more frequently than females, indicating potential biases in the peer-review process.
Supporting Evidence
- Males represented 67.5% of respondents and reviewed more manuscripts than females.
- Females took longer to review manuscripts but reviewed fewer overall.
- There was no significant difference in review load between North American males and females.
Takeaway
This study found that male referees review more papers than female referees, which might affect how research is published.
Methodology
An online survey was conducted among ecologists and evolutionary biologists to assess referee behavior.
Potential Biases
Potential bias in the representation of genders and regions among respondents.
Limitations
The study may be biased as it relied on responses from individuals subscribed to specific mailing lists.
Participant Demographics
67.5% male and 32.5% female respondents, with a majority from North America.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website