Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches
Peer review is valued in higher education, but also widely criticized in terms of potential biases, particularly gender. We evaluate gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications, extending Bornmann, Mutz, and Daniel's meta-analyses that reported small gender differences in favor of...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2009
|
| _version_ | 1797095107004989440 |
|---|---|
| author | Marsh, H Bornmann, L Mutz, R Daniel, H O'Mara, A |
| author_facet | Marsh, H Bornmann, L Mutz, R Daniel, H O'Mara, A |
| author_sort | Marsh, H |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Peer review is valued in higher education, but also widely criticized in terms of potential biases, particularly gender. We evaluate gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications, extending Bornmann, Mutz, and Daniel's meta-analyses that reported small gender differences in favor of men (d =. 04), but a substantial heterogeneity in effect sizes that compromised the robustness of their results. We contrast these findings with the most comprehensive single primary study (Marsh, Jayasinghe, and Bond) that found no gender differences for grant proposals. We juxtapose traditional (fixed- and random-effects) and multilevel models, demonstrating important advantages to the multilevel approach. Consistent with Marsh et al.'s primary study, there were no gender differences for the 40 (of 66) effect sizes from Bornmannet al.that were based on grant proposals. This lack of a gender effect for grant proposals was very robust, generalizing over country, discipline, and publication year. © 2009 AERA. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T04:23:20Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:cbc46aa1-9b7e-40ec-babd-b8db4a2dd91f |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T04:23:20Z |
| publishDate | 2009 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:cbc46aa1-9b7e-40ec-babd-b8db4a2dd91f2022-03-27T07:17:12ZGender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel ApproachesJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:cbc46aa1-9b7e-40ec-babd-b8db4a2dd91fEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2009Marsh, HBornmann, LMutz, RDaniel, HO'Mara, APeer review is valued in higher education, but also widely criticized in terms of potential biases, particularly gender. We evaluate gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications, extending Bornmann, Mutz, and Daniel's meta-analyses that reported small gender differences in favor of men (d =. 04), but a substantial heterogeneity in effect sizes that compromised the robustness of their results. We contrast these findings with the most comprehensive single primary study (Marsh, Jayasinghe, and Bond) that found no gender differences for grant proposals. We juxtapose traditional (fixed- and random-effects) and multilevel models, demonstrating important advantages to the multilevel approach. Consistent with Marsh et al.'s primary study, there were no gender differences for the 40 (of 66) effect sizes from Bornmannet al.that were based on grant proposals. This lack of a gender effect for grant proposals was very robust, generalizing over country, discipline, and publication year. © 2009 AERA. |
| spellingShingle | Marsh, H Bornmann, L Mutz, R Daniel, H O'Mara, A Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches |
| title | Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches |
| title_full | Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches |
| title_fullStr | Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches |
| title_full_unstemmed | Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches |
| title_short | Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches |
| title_sort | gender effects in the peer reviews of grant proposals a comprehensive meta analysis comparing traditional and multilevel approaches |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT marshh gendereffectsinthepeerreviewsofgrantproposalsacomprehensivemetaanalysiscomparingtraditionalandmultilevelapproaches AT bornmannl gendereffectsinthepeerreviewsofgrantproposalsacomprehensivemetaanalysiscomparingtraditionalandmultilevelapproaches AT mutzr gendereffectsinthepeerreviewsofgrantproposalsacomprehensivemetaanalysiscomparingtraditionalandmultilevelapproaches AT danielh gendereffectsinthepeerreviewsofgrantproposalsacomprehensivemetaanalysiscomparingtraditionalandmultilevelapproaches AT omaraa gendereffectsinthepeerreviewsofgrantproposalsacomprehensivemetaanalysiscomparingtraditionalandmultilevelapproaches |