IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v34y2025iprvaf031..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the cross-disciplinary utility of anonymizing applications for scientific equipment in the Australian research sector

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Kingsley
  • Nicholas Ho
  • Amanda B Chan
  • Lisa Harvey-Smith
  • Lisa A Williams

Abstract

Anonymizing applications for research resources has been demonstrated to reduce bias against women, early career researchers and other marginalized researchers, specifically for applications to use scientific equipment in planetary and space science research. We conducted a nationwide trial in Australia to evaluate the cross-disciplinary impacts of anonymizing applications for use of scientific equipment. The twofold purpose of the study was to examine whether disparities existed–and if so, to quantify their size and direction–and to evaluate how anonymizing applications would impact application outcomes, based on the gender and career seniority of the lead researcher. The trial involved applications to four Australian research entities managing access to national scientific facilities. Entity-specific modelling was carried out, followed by a meta-analysis to assess overall effects. Our evaluation reveals a noteworthy absence of gender and career seniority disparities in application outcomes before anonymization across most entities, with one exception where women-led applications received more resources in a specific program. The introduction of anonymization led to improved success rates for early-career researchers, while generally maintaining existing gender parity, with one entity showing improved success rates for women-led applications. The implications extend beyond funding outcomes, which represent only one piece of the puzzle contributing to inequity in STEM research. By enhancing success rates for early career researchers, anonymization may create a ripple effect by diversifying the research pool, and supporting, retaining and advancing researchers facing barriers in STEM research. Future research examining cultural, racial, and other biases is key to refining equity efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Kingsley & Nicholas Ho & Amanda B Chan & Lisa Harvey-Smith & Lisa A Williams, 2025. "Evaluating the cross-disciplinary utility of anonymizing applications for scientific equipment in the Australian research sector," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 34, pages 1-031..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:34:y:2025:i::p:rvaf031.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvaf031
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    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:oup:rseval:v:34:y:2025:i::p:rvaf031.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.