Reviewing applications by women - critical use of additive and reasoning evaluation methods
Two programmes regarding research funding are investigated with respect to their evaluation processes. One programme targets individuals and the other centers of excellence. The study attempts to disclose some of the features of the selection procedures and the aim is to contribute with further understanding of the mechanisms in such selection processes, which lead to disproportionate disapproval of female applicants. The use of intuitive or reasoning evaluation methods, together with quantitatively measureable or additive methods, is found to be critical for female applicants. When funding organizations try to advance their evaluation procedures and involve more of reasoning evaluation, there is a risk that other than established main stream projects fail, including applications by women. The paper ends by proposing a hypothesis which may serve as a starting point for further empirical studies.
|Date of creation:||06 Sep 2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden|
Phone: +46 8 790 95 63
Web page: http://www.infra.kth.se/cesis/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0097. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Vardan Hovsepyan)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.