In the first-ever analysis of peer-review scores for postdoctoral fellowship applications, the system is revealed as being riddled with prejudice. The policy of secrecy in evaluation must be abandoned.
Enjoying our latest content?
Log in or create an account to continue
- Access the most recent journalism from Nature's award-winning team
- Explore the latest features & opinion covering groundbreaking research
or
References
Widnall, S. E. Science 241, 1740–1745 (1988).
Cole, S., Cole, J. R. & Simon, G. A. Science 214, 881–886 (1981).
Long, J. S. Social Forces 71, 159–178 (1992).
Sonnert, G. Social Stud. Sci. 25, 35–55 (1995).
Sonnert, G. & Holton, G. Am. Sci. 84, 63–71 (1996).
Glantz, S. A. & Bero, L. A. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 272, 114–116 (1994).
Ernst, E., Resch, K. L. & Uher, E. M. Ann. Intern. Med. 116, 958 (1992).
Forsdyke, D. R. FASEB J. 7, 619–621 (1993).
Calza, L. & Gerbisa, S. Nature 374, 492 (1995).
Perez-Enciso, M. Nature 378, 760 (1995).
Goldberg, P. Trans-Action 5, 28–30 (1968).
Nieva, V. F. & Gutek, B. A. Acad. Manag. Rev. 5, 267–276 (1980).
O'Leary, V. E. & Wallston, B. S. Rev. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2, 9–43 (1982).
Frieze, I. H. in Women and Achievement: Social and Motivational Analyses (eds Mednick, M. T., Tangri, S. S. & Hoffman, L. W.) 158–171 (Hemisphere, Washington DC, 1975).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wennerås, C., Wold, A. Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature 387, 341–343 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1038/387341a0
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/387341a0
