IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Reviewing applications by women - critical use of additive and reasoning evaluation methods

Listed author(s):
  • Melin, Göran


    (SISTER and CESIS)

Registered author(s):

    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.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies in its series Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation with number 97.

    in new window

    Length: 15 pages
    Date of creation: 06 Sep 2007
    Handle: RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0097
    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:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    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 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.