IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/gender/v27y2020i6p1361-1377.html

What professors do in peer review: Interrogating assessment practices in the recruitment of professors in Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Paula Mählck
  • Hanna Li Kusterer
  • Henry Montgomery

Abstract

Sweden is known for its political will to gender equality. Sweden is also a country with a strong tradition of transparency in university recruitments. In this article, the assessment practices in the appointment of full professors in one Swedish university are investigated from an intersectional and postcolonial perspective on gender and place/space. Using a multimethod approach to investigate written evaluations of applicants, recruitment group meeting minutes and interviews with reviewers, the results show that there is great variation in how evaluation criteria are applied and filled with meaning. Moreover, in more than half of the appointment decisions the reviewers disagreed. The interview results show a structural bias operating towards researchers applying from non‐Western university contexts. At an aggregated level, national applicants have 3.88 times greater chance to be proposed for a position and national women applicants are the most likely to be proposed for the position.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula Mählck & Hanna Li Kusterer & Henry Montgomery, 2020. "What professors do in peer review: Interrogating assessment practices in the recruitment of professors in Sweden," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(6), pages 1361-1377, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:27:y:2020:i:6:p:1361-1377
    DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12500
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12500
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/gwao.12500?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karin Svedberg Helgesson & Ebba Sjögren, 2019. "No finish line: How formalization of academic assessment can undermine clarity and increase secrecy," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 558-581, May.
    2. Christine Wennerås & Agnes Wold, 1997. "Nepotism and sexism in peer-review," Nature, Nature, vol. 387(6631), pages 341-343, May.
    3. Jenny Rodriguez & Evangelina Holvino & Joyce K. Fletcher & Stella M. Nkomo & Jenny K. Rodriguez & Evangelina Holvino & Joyce K. Fletcher & Stella M. Nkomo, 2016. "The Theory and Praxis of Intersectionality in Work and Organisations: Where Do We Go From Here?," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 201-222, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Qianshuo Liu & David Pérez-Castrillo & Inés Macho-Stadler & Albert Banal-Estañol, 2021. "Similar-to-me Effects in the Grant Application Process: Applicants, Panelists, and the Likelihood of Obtaining Funds," Working Papers 1289, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. Mooney, Shelagh, 2018. "Illuminating intersectionality for tourism researchers," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 175-176.
    3. van den Besselaar, Peter & Sandström, Ulf, 2015. "Early career grants, performance, and careers: A study on predictive validity of grant decisions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 826-838.
    4. Patrícia Martinková & Dan Goldhaber & Elena Erosheva, 2018. "Disparities in ratings of internal and external applicants: A case for model-based inter-rater reliability," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Renata Guimarães Reynaldo & Kamila Pope & Juliano Borba & Stefan Sieber & Michelle Bonatti, 2023. "Women of the revolution and a politics of care: A gendered intersectional approach on an initiative to address socioenvironmental problems in a marginalized community in southern Brazil," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 2130-2154, November.
    6. Nadia Singh & Areet Kaur, 2022. "The COVID‐19 pandemic: Narratives of informal women workers in Indian Punjab," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 388-407, March.
    7. Thomas Burø & Jannick Friis Christensen & Linea Munk Petersen, 2025. "A safe space in a strange place: A case study of the safety mechanisms of CrossFit culture," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 75-99, January.
    8. Amy Hinsley & William J Sutherland & Alison Johnston, 2017. "Men ask more questions than women at a scientific conference," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    9. van Raan, A. F. J. & van Leeuwen, Th. N., 2002. "Assessment of the scientific basis of interdisciplinary, applied research: Application of bibliometric methods in Nutrition and Food Research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 611-632, May.
    10. Peter van den Besselaar & Ulf Sandström, 2016. "Gender differences in research performance and its impact on careers: a longitudinal case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 143-162, January.
    11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/8741 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Laurence Romani & Patrizia Zanoni & Lotte Holck, 2021. "Radicalizing diversity (research): Time to resume talking about class," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 8-23, January.
    13. Fengyuan Liu & Petter Holme & Matteo Chiesa & Bedoor AlShebli & Talal Rahwan, 2023. "Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 353-364, March.
    14. Marta Vohlídalová, 2021. "Early-Career Women Academics: Between Neoliberalism and Gender Conservatism," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 26(1), pages 27-43, March.
    15. Pat O’Connor & Gemma Irvine, 2020. "Multi-Level State Interventions and Gender Equality in Higher Education Institutions: The Irish Case," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Dorian R. Woods & Yvonne Benschop & Marieke van den Brink, 2022. "What is intersectional equality? A definition and goal of equality for organizations," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 92-109, January.
    17. Karen L. Webber & Manuel González Canché, 2018. "Is There a Gendered Path to Tenure? A Multi-State Approach to Examine the Academic Trajectories of U.S. Doctoral Recipients in the Sciences," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 59(7), pages 897-932, November.
    18. Charles Barthold & Victor Krawczyk & Marco Berti & Vincenza Priola, 2022. "Intersectionality on screen. A coloniality perspective to understand popular culture representations of intersecting oppressions at work," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 1890-1909, November.
    19. Friederike Mengel & Jan Sauermann & Ulf Zölitz, 2019. "Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 535-566.
    20. Michał Krawczyk & Magdalena Smyk, 2015. "Gender, beauty and support networks in academia: evidence from a field experiment," Working Papers 2015-43, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    21. Clément Bosquet & Pierre‐Philippe Combes & Cecilia García‐Peñalosa, 2019. "Gender and Promotions: Evidence from Academic Economists in France," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 1020-1053, July.

    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:bla:gender:v:27:y:2020:i:6:p:1361-1377. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0968-6673 .

    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.