Peer review perpetuates barriers for historically excluded groups-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Peer review perpetuates barriers for historically excluded groups

Published:2023-03-13 Issue:4 Volume:7 Page:512-523
ISSN:2397-334X
Container-title:Nature Ecology & Evolution
language:en
Short-container-title:Nat Ecol Evol

Author:

Smith Olivia M.^ORCID,Davis Kayla L.^ORCID,Pizza Riley B.^ORCID,Waterman Robin^ORCID,Dobson Kara C.^ORCID,Foster Brianna^ORCID,Jarvey Julie C.^ORCID,Jones Leonard N.,Leuenberger Wendy^ORCID,Nourn Nan^ORCID,Conway Emily E.,Fiser Cynthia M.,Hansen Zoe A.^ORCID,Hristova Ani,Mack Caitlin^ORCID,Saunders Alyssa N.,Utley Olivia J.,Young Moriah L.^ORCID,Davis Courtney L.

Funder

Michigan State University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Ecology,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

Link

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-023-01999-w.pdf

Reference50 articles.

1. Silbiger, N. J. & Stubler, A. D. Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM. PeerJ 7, e8247 (2019).

2. Peters, D. P. & Ceci, S. J. Peer-review practices of psychological journals: the fate of published articles, submitted again. Behav. Brain Sci. 5, 187–195 (1982).

3. Tregenza, T. Gender bias in the refereeing process? Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 349–350 (2002).