The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: challenges and future directions

被引:49
作者
Sato, Sayaka [1 ]
Gygax, Pascal Mark [1 ]
Randall, Julian [2 ]
Schmid Mast, Marianne [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fribourg, Dept Psychol, Rue P A de Faucigny 2, CH-1700 Fribourg, Switzerland
[2] Univ Fribourg, Res Promot Serv, Fribourg, Switzerland
[3] Univ Lausanne, Fac Business & Econ, Lausanne, Switzerland
关键词
Gender inequality; Research grant funding decisions; Equal opportunities; Female researchers; Grant peer review; R01 APPLICATION CRITIQUES; GENDER PAY GAP; SEX-DIFFERENCES; PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR; WOMEN; SCIENCE; BIAS; SUCCESS; PROMOTION; PRODUCTIVITY;
D O I
10.1007/s10734-020-00626-y
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The growing literature on gender inequality in academia attests to the challenge that awaits female researchers during their academic careers. However, research has not yet conclusively resolved whether these biases persist during the peer review process of research grant funding and whether they impact respective funding decisions. Whereas many have argued for the existence of gender inequality in grant peer reviews and outcomes, others have demonstrated that gender equality is upheld during these processes. In the present paper, we illustrate how these opinions have come to such opposing conclusions and consider methodological and contextual factors that render these findings inconclusive. More specifically, we argue that a more comprehensive approach is needed to further the debate, encompassing individual and systemic biases as well as more global social barriers. We also argue that examining gender biases during the peer review process of research grant funding poses critical methodological challenges that deserve special attention. We conclude by providing directions for possible future research and more general considerations that may improve grant funding opportunities and career paths for female researchers.
引用
收藏
页码:145 / 162
页数:18
相关论文
共 119 条
[1]   Dutch research funding, gender bias, and Simpson's paradox [J].
Albers, Casper J. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2015, 112 (50) :E6828-E6829
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2015, DIRECTORATE SCI TECH
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2020, VIS 2020 2006 REP U
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1999, GEND EQ PROJ OV SCH
[5]   Younger academics' constructions of 'authenticity', 'success' and professional identity [J].
Archer, Louise .
STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2008, 33 (04) :385-403
[6]   Salary structure effects and the gender pay gap in academia [J].
Barbezat, DA ;
Hughes, JW .
RESEARCH IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2005, 46 (06) :621-640
[7]   Gender and research funding success: Case of the Belgian FRS-FNRS [J].
Beck, Raphael ;
Halloin, Veronique .
RESEARCH EVALUATION, 2017, 26 (02) :115-123
[8]   Gender inequality in awarded research grants [J].
Bedi, Gillinder ;
Van Dam, Nicholas T. ;
Munafo, Marcus .
LANCET, 2012, 380 (9840) :474-474
[9]   Gender disparities in high-quality research revealed by Nature Index journals [J].
Bendels, Michael H. K. ;
Mueller, Ruth ;
Brueggmann, Doerthe ;
Groneberg, David A. .
PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (01)
[10]   SCIENCE FUNDING NSF's 'Big Pitch' Tests Anonymized Grant Reviews [J].
Bhattacharjee, Yudhijit .
SCIENCE, 2012, 336 (6084) :969-970