Bias in Peer Review

Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G., & Cronin, B. (2013). Bias in Peer Review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2-17.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2013

DOI

10.1002/asi.22784

Link

https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22784

Cited from

law_governance, library_information_science

Cited by

2 citations across 2 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Conflict of Interest
  • T4: Competition within Gatekeeping Roles. The formal tension: a gatekeeper (editor, journal, app store, credit rater) must evaluate others while competing with them in some other domain.

    This sourceSurveys empirical evidence on bias in scholarly peer review (where reviewers act as gatekeepers in fields in which they also compete), while noting the strength of several hypothesized biases is methodologically contested — supports the gatekeeper-competitor claim. (Prose slightly overstates the paper's equivocal conclusion — see flag.) Live-verified (Wiley).

• Peer Review
  • … plausible institutional value should not be inflated into strong universal causal claims without comparative evidence. Research on bias likewise identifies multiple possible mechanisms—status, affiliation, nationality, gender, discipline, content, and confirmation effects—whose evidence and operationalization vary.

Verification

This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:6bb8a63f23f3 · see in the full table