If you thought the glass ceiling for female scientists had been shattered, think again. Women are more likely to have their research published if the referees who peer review their work are unaware of their gender, a new study suggests.
It has long been suspected that "single-blind" peer review - in which reviewers know a researcher's identity but not vice versa - can lead to bias. Gender, nationality and nepotism have also been identified as biasing factors in the application process for research fellowships.
Some suggest that double-blind peer review, in which neither side knows the other's identity, would be a fairer system. To find out if this is true, Amber Budden at the University of Toronto in Canada and her colleagues looked at the gender of the authors of papers accepted by Behavioural Ecology before and after it switched to double-blind peer review in 2001.
In the four years ...
To continue reading this article, subscribe to receive access to all of newscientist.com, including 20 years of archive content.