|
Field
Paper Abstract
|
Before
Do female economists and economists at lower-ranked institutions face discrimination during the publication process? To answer this question, we ask journal editors to evaluate the quality of abstracts for various solo-authored papers which differ along the dimensions of gender and institution of the author. We exogenously vary whether editors observe the name and/or institution of the author. We identify positive institutional bias for economists in the top institutions. However, when the name of the author is also revealed, this positive institutional bias only applies to males. Hence, institution serves as a signal for quality of men’s work, but not women’s.
|
After
How might the visibility of an author's name and/or institutional affiliation allow bias to enter the evaluation of economics papers? We ask highly qualified journal editors to review abstracts of solo-authored papers which differ along the dimensions of gender and institution of the author. We exogenously vary whether editors observe the name and/or institution of the author. We identify positive name visibility effects for female economists and positive institution visibility effects for economists at the top institutions. Our results suggest that male economists at top institutions benefit the most from non-blind evaluations, followed by female economists (regardless of their institution).
|
|
Field
Paper Citation
|
Before
Ersoy, Fulya and Pate, Jennifer, Invisible Hurdles: Gender and Institutional Bias in the Publication Process in Economics (June 8, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3870368
|
After
Ersoy, Fulya and Pate, Jennifer, Invisible hurdles: Gender and institutional differences in the evaluation of economics papers, Economic Inquiry, 2023.
|
|
Field
Paper URL
|
Before
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3870368
|
After
https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.13145
|