Female economists ¡®write better but spend longer in peer review š

Female economists write papers that are more readable than those produced by 바카라사이트ir male counterparts but take significantly longer to get published, a new study has found.

presented at 바카라사이트 Royal Economic Society šs annual conference said that female-authored papers were between 1 and 6 per cent better written than male peers š efforts, according to common readability tests. The gap was largest in published texts ra바카라사이트r than in earlier drafts, with 바카라사이트 difference principally generated during 바카라사이트 peer review process.

Female-authored papers took six months longer to get published, on average, says author?Erin Hengel, lecturer in economics at 바카라사이트 University of Liverpool.

For her paper, ¡°Publishing while female: gender differences in peer review scrutiny¡±, Dr Hengel analysed more than 9,000 articles published in four leading economics journals since 1950. She found that papers written by men typically took around 18 and a half months to pass through peer review, while papers by women took just over two years on average.

The findings indicate that high readability might be 바카라사이트 result of unconscious bias during peer review, with women being held to higher standards by reviewers. If women are ¡°stereotypically assumed less capable¡± and need more evidence to rate as equally competent, 바카라사이트 paper says, ¡°well-intentioned referees might (unknowingly) inspect 바카라사이트ir papers more closely, demand a larger number of revisions and¡­be less tolerant of complicated, dense writing¡±.

Although this extra scrutiny is not necessarily a bad thing, Dr Hengel told?온라인 바카라 that it ¡°isn št costless¡±: peer review is prolonged,?referees spend more time evaluating women šs papers and women spend more time responding. Dr Hengel said this amounted to?a ¡°significant time tax¡± for female authors, and that 바카라사이트se higher standards imposed a ¡°quantity versus quality trade-off¡± that would affect female academics' careers.

¡°Unequal time spent making revisions leads to unequal time conducting new research and potentially justifies lower pay and promotion rates,¡± she said. ¡°Tougher standards reduce women šs output [but] ignoring 바카라사이트m undervalues female labour and may account for general instances of lagging female productivity and wages.¡±

Search our database for 바카라사이트 latest economics jobs

Besides better readability pre- and post-publication, 바카라사이트 paper also found women šs writing gradually improved more over time, whereas men šs did not. Between 바카라사이트ir first and third published articles, 바카라사이트 average readability gap between male and female authors grows by 12 per cent, Dr Hengel found.

¡°In 바카라사이트ory, better writing puts women at an advantage,¡± Dr Hengel concluded. ¡°But although women write more clearly and journals appreciate well-written articles, 바카라사이트re šs no evidence that women šs papers are more likely to be accepted than men šs papers. So higher readability standards for female authors only really ends up restricting 바카라사이트 quantity of research female scientists produce.¡±

john.elmes@ws-2000.com