Study finds research by women may spend more time in peer review; could help understand gender gap

New Delhi: Women-authored scientific research articles may typically spend up to 15 per cent more time in peer review, compared to those authored by men, according to an analysis that helps explain gender gap in publication rates and representation.

Researchers from the US' University of Nevada estimated, "for every 50 papers published by a female author, she will have spent on average 350-750 days longer than her male counterparts waiting for reviews and editorial decisions and/or revising manuscripts".

Peer review is a quality control activity in which a research paper is assessed by independent experts in the field before publication to ensure validity, originality and scientific rigour. Time taken from a paper being submitted for peer review until it gets accepted for publication is counted as peer review time.

The study, published in the PLOS Biology journal, looked at 3.65 crore articles published across more than 36,300 biomedical and life sciences journals. Articles indexed until the end of 2023 in the 'PubMed' database, managed by the US' National Institute of Health, were included in the analysis.

Results from the "largest analysis to date" show that "the median (typical) amount of time spent under review is 7.4 per cent to 14.6 per cent longer for female-authored articles than for male-authored articles, and that differences remain significant after controlling for several factors." The team said that women are underrepresented in academia, especially in STEMM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics, medicine), at top institutions and in senior positions.

Studies also suggest that the gender gap in representation may be specific to certain fields of research, the researchers said.

A reason contributing to the disparity could be the many obstacles that women face compared to their male counterparts, the researchers said, adding that there is a substantial debate around biases in the peer review system against women.

A comprehensive understanding of how women are treated by the peer review system requires a thorough examination of biomedicine and the life sciences -- scientists in these fields produce 36 per cent of research articles published yearly worldwide, the team said.

Peer review of articles with a female first author typically took seven days longer, compared to that of articles with a male first author. Articles with a female corresponding author typically took 13 days longer in peer review, compared to those with a male corresponding author, the study found.

A first author is usually the main researcher who executes a large portion of the work throughout the research process, signifying a higher intellectual contribution, while a corresponding author manages the pre and post-publication duties, serving as a point of contact for communication.

Articles with a woman first author and a woman corresponding author spent 15 days longer in peer review, compared to those with a man first author and a man corresponding author.

Articles authored by all-female teams were estimated to spend nine days more in peer review, compared to those authored by all-male teams.

The authors also show that authors based in low-income countries tend to experience longer review times.