Promoting equity in the peer review process of journal publication

Abstract

While there is evidence to support the existence of identity-based disparities, inequities, and biases in the academic journal peer-review process, little research supports the presence of this bias in the peer-review process for academic journals in science education.

Complex pathways within nested systems: Exploring approaches to centering equity in peer review

“…In any field, striving towards equity will have some limitations, as systems interrelate and are nested within larger systems. Bancroft et al (2022) describe, "Inequity refers to unequal outcomes between different groups despite evidence of equal intellectual merit." In peer review, as in other processes, inequities can emerge both from aspects of a particular interaction, and because such events are nested within larger social inequalities.…”

“…What would change is the presence of biased and rude comments that do not add anything to the substance of the review and convey barriers that are likely to have a disproportionately negative impact on scholars with marginalized identities. Bancroft et al (2022) recommend some potential changes: "We encourage editors and journals to seek ways to evaluate the quality of reviewer comments and remove personal, rude, and biased comments from reviews. It is also important for editors to engage with these reviewers on the unprofessional nature of the comments and how to proceed more professionally moving forward."…”

“…In addition to the biases that people hold regarding institutional prestige or the types of research, there are forms of biases in the peer-review process that emerge based on identity characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and/or gender. For example, Bancroft et al (2022) describe the implicit gender and racial biases that can impact reviewers' evaluations, and Nkrumah and Mutegi (2022) discuss the ways in which pressures towards assimilation pose obstacles to submissions by culturally and linguistically diverse authors. In addition, the peer-review process may tend to favor the forms of research of more established scholars, which may lead to the exclusion of emerging scholars (Eisenhart, 2002).…”

“…They provide recommendations for adopting equity‐focused rubrics, supporting marginalized grant writers, and ensuring that funded proposals are tied to the needs, interests, and ideas of the communities involved. Bancroft et al (2022) focus on biases in the process of journal review, investigating the presence of unbalanced review boards in which minoritized groups lack representation, considering the training that journals provide regarding biases, and providing recommendations for approaches to reviewing manuscripts that increase equity and fairness. Nkrumah and Mutegi (2022) point out the specific lack of investigation of disparities in the peer‐review process based on race and highlight the need for corrective justice for people of African descent.…”

“…Bancroft et al (2022) describe, “Inequity refers to unequal outcomes between different groups despite evidence of equal intellectual merit.” In peer review, as in other processes, inequities can emerge both from aspects of a particular interaction, and because such events are nested within larger social inequalities. In terms of the peer review events themselves, unfair reviews can occur due to identifiable biases held by individual reviewers.…”