IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v390y1997i6659d10.1038_37213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No evidence of sexism in peer review

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Grant

    (The Wellcome Trust)

  • Simon Burden

    (Medical Research Council)

  • Gillian Breen

    (Medical Research Council)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan Grant & Simon Burden & Gillian Breen, 1997. "No evidence of sexism in peer review," Nature, Nature, vol. 390(6659), pages 438-438, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:390:y:1997:i:6659:d:10.1038_37213
    DOI: 10.1038/37213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/37213
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/37213?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grant Lewison, 2001. "The quantity and quality of female researchers: A bibliometric study of Iceland," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(1), pages 29-43, September.
    2. Viner, Neil & Powell, Philip & Green, Rod, 2004. "Institutionalized biases in the award of research grants: a preliminary analysis revisiting the principle of accumulative advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 443-454, April.
    3. Lutter, Mark & Habicht, Isabel M. & Schröder, Martin, 2022. "Gender differences in the determinants of becoming a professor in Germany. An event history analysis of academic psychologists from 1980 to 2019," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    4. Squazzoni, Flaminio & Gandelli, Claudio, 2012. "Saint Matthew strikes again: An agent-based model of peer review and the scientific community structure," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 265-275.
    5. Marjolijn N. Wijnen & Jorg J. M. Massen & Mariska E. Kret, 2021. "Gender bias in the allocation of student grants," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5477-5488, July.
    6. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:390:y:1997:i:6659:d:10.1038_37213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.