Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process

Stefano Bianchini (), Patrick Llerena, Sıla Öcalan-Özel and Emre Özel ()
Additional contact information
Stefano Bianchini: BETA - Bureau d'Économie Théorique et Appliquée - AgroParisTech - UNISTRA - Université de Strasbourg - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) Mulhouse - Colmar - UL - Université de Lorraine - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement
Sıla Öcalan-Özel: BETA - Bureau d'Économie Théorique et Appliquée - AgroParisTech - UNISTRA - Université de Strasbourg - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) Mulhouse - Colmar - UL - Université de Lorraine - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement
Emre Özel: BETA - Bureau d'Économie Théorique et Appliquée - AgroParisTech - UNISTRA - Université de Strasbourg - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) Mulhouse - Colmar - UL - Université de Lorraine - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This study seeks to draw connections between the grant proposal peer-review and the gender representation in research consortia. We examined the implementation of a multidisciplinary, pan-European funding scheme-EUROpean COllaborative RESearch Scheme (2003-2015)-and the reviewers' materials that this generated. EUROCORES promoted investigator-driven, multinational collaborative research in multiple scientific areas and brought together 9158 Principal Investigators (PI) who teamed up in 1347 international consortia that were sequentially evaluated by 467 expert panel members and 1862 external reviewers. We found systematically unfavourable evaluations for consortia with a higher proportion of female PIs. This gender effect was evident in the evaluation outcomes of both panel members and reviewers: applications from consortia with a higher share of female scientists were less successful in panel selection and received lower scores from external reviewers. Interestingly, we found a systematic discrepancy between the evaluative language of written review reports and the scores assigned by reviewers that works against consortia with a higher share of female participants. Reviewers did not perceive female scientists as being less competent in their comments, but they were negatively sensitive to a high female ratio within a consortium when scoring the proposed research project.

Date: 2022
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ppm
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03921706
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 2022, 9 (1), pp.195. ⟨10.1057/s41599-022-01204-6⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.science/hal-03921706/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process (2022)
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:hal:journl:hal-03921706

DOI: 10.1057/s41599-022-01204-6

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().