IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/25967.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?

Author

Listed:
  • David Card
  • Stefano DellaVigna
  • Patricia Funk
  • Nagore Iriberri

Abstract

We study the role of gender in the evaluation of economic research using submissions to four leading journals. We find that referee gender has no effect on the relative assessment of female- versus male-authored papers, suggesting that any differential biases of male referees are negligible. To determine whether referees as a whole impose different standards for female authors, we compare citations for female and male-authored papers, holding constant referee evaluations and other characteristics. We find that female-authored papers receive about 25% more citations than observably similar male-authored papers. Editors largely follow the referees, resulting in a 6 percentage point lower probability of a revise and resubmit verdict for female-authored papers relative to a citation-maximizing benchmark. In their desk rejection decisions, editors treat female authors more favorably, though they still impose a higher bar than would be implied by citation-maximization. We find no differences in the informativeness of female versus male referees, or in the weight that editors place on the recommendations of female versus male referees. We also find no differences in editorial delays for female versus male-authored papers.

Suggested Citation

  • David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2019. "Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?," NBER Working Papers 25967, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25967
    Note: AP CF CH DEV ED HC HE IO ITI LE LS PE POL PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25967.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html. Free access is also available to older working papers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heather Sarsons, 2015. "Recognition for Group Work," Working Paper 254946, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    2. Ghazala Azmat & Rosa Ferrer Zarzuela, 2012. "Gender gaps in performance: Evidence from young lawyers," Economics Working Papers 1300, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Oct 2015.
    3. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1091-1119, April.
    4. Hengel, E., 2017. "Publishing while Female. Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1753, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Broder, Ivy E, 1993. "Review of NSF Economics Proposals: Gender and Institutional Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(4), pages 964-970, September.
    6. Amanda Bayer & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 2016. "Diversity in the Economics Profession: A New Attack on an Old Problem," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 221-242, Fall.
    7. Ghazala Azmat & Rosa Ferrer, 2017. "Gender Gaps in Performance: Evidence from Young Lawyers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(5), pages 1306-1355.
    8. Ghazala Azmat & Rosa Ferrer, 2017. "Gender Gaps in Performance: Evidence from Young Lawyers," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/3t1fcs7p369, Sciences Po.
    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. Bransch, Felix & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2017. "Male Gatekeepers Gender Bias in the Publishing Process?," IZA Discussion Papers 11089, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Linda Babcock & Maria P. Recalde & Lise Vesterlund & Laurie Weingart, 2017. "Gender Differences in Accepting and Receiving Requests for Tasks with Low Promotability," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(3), pages 714-747, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zoë B. Cullen & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2019. "The Old Boys' Club: Schmoozing and the Gender Gap," NBER Working Papers 26530, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. repec:cpr:ceprdp:14190 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Hamish Low & Luigi Pistaferri, 2019. "Disability Insurance: Error Rates and Gender Differences," NBER Working Papers 26513, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. repec:cpr:ceprdp:14169 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Hamish Low & Luigi Pistaferri, 2019. "Disability Insurance: Error Rates and Gender Differences," Economics Series Working Papers 889, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    6. Farré, Lídia & Ortega, Francesc, 2019. "Selecting Talent: Gender Differences in Participation and Success in Competitive Selection Processes," IZA Discussion Papers 12530, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:25967. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.