IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v54y2025i5s0048733325000460.html

Women advocates and men critics: How referees' gender influences candidates' likelihood of receiving a promotion

Author

Listed:
  • Masters-Waage, Theodore
  • Madera, Juan
  • St. Aubin, Ally
  • Ash, Joshua
  • Edema-Sillo, Ebenezer
  • Spitzmueller, Christiane

Abstract

External review letters (ERLs) play a critical role in the promotion and tenure (P&T) process. However, recently, scholars have questioned their validity, given the strong relationships between letter writer characteristics and letter content. Building on Madera et al. (2024), we develop a social role-based theory of how letter writer gender affects letter content and voting outcomes. Results from within-candidate analysis find gender differences in letters written for the same candidate, 1) men letter writers used more personal pronouns (I/me/myself) and women used more other-pronouns (she/he), 2) letters written by women - compared to men - had a more positive tone overall, and 3) used less doubt language. Collectively, this suggests that women write more supportive and candidate-focused letters than men in the P&T process. Confirming this, we find that - controlling for school, discipline, scholarly productivity, and demographics - candidates with a higher proportion of women letter writers (i.e., lower proportion of men) have more positive P&T outcomes. These findings underscore the need for P&T reforms to improve equity in the external review letter-writing and writer selection process.

Suggested Citation

  • Masters-Waage, Theodore & Madera, Juan & St. Aubin, Ally & Ash, Joshua & Edema-Sillo, Ebenezer & Spitzmueller, Christiane, 2025. "Women advocates and men critics: How referees' gender influences candidates' likelihood of receiving a promotion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(5).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:5:s0048733325000460
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2025.105217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733325000460
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2025.105217?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alison Abbott & David Cyranoski & Nicola Jones & Brendan Maher & Quirin Schiermeier & Richard Van Noorden, 2010. "Metrics: Do metrics matter?," Nature, Nature, vol. 465(7300), pages 860-862, June.
    2. Madera, Juan M. & Spitzmueller, Christiane & Yu, Heyao & Edema-Sillo, Ebenezer & Clarke, Mark S.F., 2024. "External review letters in academic promotion and tenure decisions are reflective of reviewer characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    3. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    4. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Madrid, Hector P., 2016. "Overconfidence in personnel selection: When and why unstructured interview information can hurt hiring decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 27-44.
    5. Theodore Masters-Waage & Christiane Spitzmueller & Ebenezer Edema-Sillo & Ally St. Aubin & Michelle Penn-Marshall & Erika Henderson & Peggy Lindner & Cynthia Werner & Tracey Rizzuto & Juan Madera, 2024. "Underrepresented minority faculty in the USA face a double standard in promotion and tenure decisions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(11), pages 2107-2118, November.
    6. Erin Hengel, 2022. "Publishing While Female: are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2951-2991.
    7. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2007. "Do Women Shy Away From Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1067-1101.
    8. H Andrew Schwartz & Johannes C Eichstaedt & Margaret L Kern & Lukasz Dziurzynski & Stephanie M Ramones & Megha Agrawal & Achal Shah & Michal Kosinski & David Stillwell & Martin E P Seligman & Lyle H U, 2013. "Personality, Gender, and Age in the Language of Social Media: The Open-Vocabulary Approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Jason Abrevaya & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2012. "Charity and Favoritism in the Field: Are Female Economists Nicer (To Each Other)?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 202-207, February.
    10. Lutz Bornmann & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2007. "What do we know about the h index?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(9), pages 1381-1385, July.
    11. Silvia Saccardo & Aniela Pietrasz & Uri Gneezy, 2018. "On the Size of the Gender Difference in Competitiveness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1541-1554, April.
    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. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2021. "Gender Gaps in the Evaluation of Research: Evidence from Submissions to Economics Conferences," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(3), pages 590-618, June.
    2. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2019. "Gender gaps in the evaluation of research: evidence from submissions to economics conferences (Updated March 2020)," Working Papers 1918, Banco de España, revised Mar 2020.
    3. Cagatay Bircan & Guido Friebel & Tristan Stahl, 2025. "Gender Promotion Gaps in Knowledge Work: The Role of Task Assignment in Teams," RFBerlin Discussion Paper Series 2518, ROCKWOOL Foundation Berlin (RFBerlin).
    4. Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & Mar�a In�s Moraes & Tatiana P�rez, 2021. "Women in Research in Economics in Uruguay," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 40(84), pages 763-790.
    5. Pierre Deschamps, 2024. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: A Boon or a Bane for Women?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(11), pages 7486-7505, November.
    6. Theodore Masters-Waage & Christiane Spitzmueller & Ebenezer Edema-Sillo & Ally St. Aubin & Michelle Penn-Marshall & Erika Henderson & Peggy Lindner & Cynthia Werner & Tracey Rizzuto & Juan Madera, 2024. "Underrepresented minority faculty in the USA face a double standard in promotion and tenure decisions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(11), pages 2107-2118, November.
    7. Paula Pereda, Fabiana Rocha & Liz Matsunaga & Maria Dolores Montoya Diaz & Renata Narita & Bruna Borges, 2021. "Gender differences in the academic career of economics in Brazil," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 40(84), pages 815-892.
    8. Roberto Asmat & Karol J. Borowiecki & Marc T. Law, 2024. "Competing for Equality: Gender Bias Among Juries in International Piano Competitions, 1890-2023," ACEI Working Paper Series AWP-03-2024, Association for Cultural Economics International.
    9. Pierre Deschamps, 2018. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: a Boon or a Bane for Women?," Post-Print hal-03393117, HAL.
    10. Pierre Deschamps, 2018. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: a Boon or a Bane for Women?," SciencePo Working papers hal-03393117, HAL.
    11. Evelina Gavrilova-Zoutman & Steffen Juranek, 2025. "The Role of Reviewer Characteristics on the Diversity of Successful Applicants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(5), pages 1726-1744, September.
    12. Piera Bello & Alessandra Casarico & Debora Nozza, 2023. "Research Similarity and Women in Academia," CESifo Working Paper Series 10657, CESifo.
    13. Ifcher, John & Zarghamee, Homa, 2020. "Competitive Preferences among Asians in the U.S," IZA Discussion Papers 13913, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2020. "Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(1), pages 269-327.
    15. Laura Hospido & Luc Laeven & Ana Lamo, 2022. "The Gender Promotion Gap: Evidence from Central Banking," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(5), pages 981-996, December.
    16. Balafoutas, Loukas & Sutter, Matthias, 2019. "How uncertainty and ambiguity in tournaments affect gender differences in competitive behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-13.
    17. Gallus, Jana & Bhatia, Sudeep, 2020. "Gender, power and emotions in the collaborative production of knowledge: A large-scale analysis of Wikipedia editor conversations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 115-130.
    18. Theodore C. Masters-Waage & Juan M. Madera & Ebenezer Edema-Sillo & Ally St. Aubin & Peggy Lindner & Maritza Gaytan & Heyao Yu & Christiane Spitzmueller, 2026. "Evaluating multiple candidates simultaneously reduces racial disparities in promotion and tenure," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Christopher W. Gardiner & Eva Markowsky, 2025. "Gender and Performance Under Competitive Pressure: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies," CEPA Discussion Papers 94, Center for Economic Policy Analysis.
    20. Helena Fornwagner & Monika Pompeo & Nina Serdarevic, 2023. "Choosing Competition on Behalf of Someone Else," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1555-1574, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:5:s0048733325000460. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.