tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post7952513598803604895..comments2024-03-29T01:19:46.849-04:00Comments on Eco-Evo Evo-Eco: Abiding in the midst of ignoranceBen Hallerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17875404974157070805noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-15663819365335948142018-12-19T10:16:46.034-05:002018-12-19T10:16:46.034-05:00So if I'm reading this right, the net effect o...So if I'm reading this right, the net effect of (optional) double-blind review at Am Nat is slightly perverse in terms of the gender balance of accepted papers?<br /><br />The obvious fix to try is switching to mandatory double-blind review, and I'd support that. Whether that will actually fix the problem is an empirical question. What if blinding is seen through, or thought to be seen through, non-randomly with respect to author gender, and what if reviewers who see through blinding or think they have are a touch more positive? I hope not; only one way to find out.<br /><br />On a different topic: what proactive steps do you think Am Nat, or any journal, could take to encourage submissions from women first authors? The percentage of women among first authors of Am Nat submissions is basically the same as that at other leading EEB journals, based on the data I've seen (and assuming I'm recalling the data correctly...). Which isn't to suggest that everything is fine, but does raise the question of what any one journal can do to address the issue. <br /><br />Did the proportion of submissions with women first authors jump after Am Nat switched to optional double-blind review? (I ask about a jump because I'm guessing it was on a slow upward trend before the switch.) Dr. Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02948439373673427525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-81438304800598093142018-12-17T16:26:06.898-05:002018-12-17T16:26:06.898-05:00There seems to be a bias favoring females when the...There seems to be a bias favoring females when the identity of the gender is revealed...very troubling. When females opt out of double blind, 62.5% of papers are accepted, a rate significantly higher than the 54% acceptance rate during double blind studies. Implicit bias against males?Whitneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13625780924557249141noreply@blogger.com