About This Project

New scientific findings are usually made visible through publishing in peer reviewed scientific journals. It has been long-observed that the editors and reviewers evaluating submissions to these journals give substantially better evaluations to scientists from Western rather than non-Western countries. Why? This project will investigate the causes of global disparities in publishing success using administrative data from a major scientific publishing company.

Ask the Scientists

What is the context of this research?

New scientific findings are usually made visible through publishing in peer reviewed journals. It has been long-observed that the editors and reviewers evaluating submissions to these journals tend to give substantially better evaluations to scientists from Western rather than non-Western countries. Why?

What is the significance of this project?

Understanding who publishes in scientific journals is equivalent to understanding whose ideas become "facts" and whose ideas remain invisible. Consequently, it is important to understand whether the publishing system is biased towards scientists from particular regions, such as Western countries. It is also important to understand how the bias, if any, can be mitigated. Our project focuses on whether there is bias in how authors are assigned to reviewers. Preliminary evidence shows that authors from Western countries are much more likely to be assigned to reviewers from their own country, and such reviewers happen to be systematically more favorable.

What are the goals of the project?

Our goals are to examine whether the scientific publishing system is biased towards authors from particular countries, and if such bias exists, how it can be mitigated.