Publishing While Female: are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review

Erin Hengel

The Economic Journal, 2022, vol. 132, issue 648, 2951-2991

Abstract: Female authors are under-represented in top economics journals. In this paper, I investigate whether higher writing standards contribute to the problem. I find that (i) female-authored papers are 1%–6% better written than equivalent papers by men; (ii) the gap widens during peer review; (iii) women improve their writing as they publish more papers (but men do not); (iv) female-authored papers take longer under review. Using a subjective expected utility framework, I argue that higher writing standards for women are consistent with these stylised facts. A counterfactual analysis suggests that senior female economists may, as a result, write at least 5% more clearly than they otherwise would. As a final exercise, I show tentative evidence that women adapt to biased treatment in ways that may disguise it as voluntary choice.

Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (52)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/ueac032 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Working Paper: Publishing while Female. Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review (2017)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:econjl:v:132:y:2022:i:648:p:2951-2991.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

The Economic Journal is currently edited by Francesco Lippi

More articles in The Economic Journal from Royal Economic Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press () and ().