Peer Review: A Gender-Neutral Measure to Transparent Quality in Science?

• In Event: Transforming Early Academic Careers: Global Challenges and Individual Trajectories - I: Addressing Inequalities in Academic Careers

Abstract

Peer reviews or assessments are very important in science and institutions of higher education. Quantity of publications in journals with peer review plays a central role for definition of scientific excellence of a person and in in recruitment of scientists. There is a general belief in academia that publication in a peer-reviewed journal shows a higher qualification than a publication in a journal without peer review or in books. What is nearly never considered is the integration of scientists and reviewers in relevant networks, questioning the principle of meritocracy. Even though mostly men’s networks play an important and powerful role in the evaluation system of science they are not considered as biasing objectivity of results. In these networks of so-called gender-neutral journals, women participate still less in comparison to men. If female scientists would send an equal number of papers, they would have a less probability for publication. The results are that in the same field male scienntists would seem more qualified in comparison to female scientists.
In recruitment processes for positions of full professors to measure qualification of scientists, peer review are obligatory. People in academia think that this procedure is the best measure to find the best-qualified scientists for positons as professor and that this measure is objective, but it is not. The selection of reviewer is not neutral at all, and, that the reviews are not objective either, even though this has been the rationale of this procedure. The paper will discuss examples of biases.

Author

• Felizitas Sagebiel, University of Wuppertal