Language and socioeconomics predict geographic variation in peer review outcomes at an ecology journal
C. Sean Burns () and
Charles W. Fox ()
Additional contact information
C. Sean Burns: University of Kentucky
Charles W. Fox: University of Kentucky
Scientometrics, 2017, vol. 113, issue 2, No 22, 1113-1127
Abstract:
Abstract Papers submitted by scientists located in western nations generally fare better in the peer review process than do papers submitted by scientists from elsewhere. This paper examines geographic variation in peer review outcomes (whether a manuscript is sent for review, review scores obtained, and final decisions by editors) for 3529 submissions over a 4.5 year period at the journal Functional Ecology. In particular, we test whether geographic variation in language and socioeconomics are adequate to explain most or are all of this variation. There was no relationship between the geographic regions of handling editors and the decisions to send papers for review or invite revision, but there was substantial variation among author geographic locations; generally papers from first authors located in Oceania, the United States, and the United Kingdom fared better, and papers from first authors located in Africa, Asia, and Latin America fared worst. Language and the Human Development Index (HDI) explained the geographic variation in the proportion of papers sent for review, but socioeconomics alone (HDI) was the best predictor of mean review scores obtained by papers and whether authors were invited to submit a revision. Though we cannot exclude a role for editor and reviewer biases against authors based on their geographic location, variation in socioeconomics and language explain much of the variation in manuscript editorial and peer review outcomes among authors from different regions of the world.
Keywords: Peer review; Language bias; Geographic bias; Socioeconomics; Human development index; 62P25 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C12 C13 C14 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)
Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2517-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
Related works:
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:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2517-5
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2517-5
Access Statistics for this article
Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel
More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().