Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Persistent Nepotism in Peer-Review
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, The Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI). Department of Sociology.
2008 (English)In: Scientometrics, Vol. 74, no 2, 175-189 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In a replication of the high-profile contribution by Wennerås and Wold on grant peer-review, we investigate new applications processed by the medical research council in Sweden. Introducing a normalisation method for ranking applications that takes into account the differences between committees, we also use a normalisation of bibliometric measures by field. Finally, we perform a regression analysis with interaction effects. Our results indicate that female principal investigators (PIs) receive a bonus of 10% on scores, in relation to their male colleagues. However, male and female PIs having a reviewer affiliation collect an even higher bonus, approximately 15%. Nepotism seems to be a persistent problem in the Swedish grant peer review system.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. Vol. 74, no 2, 175-189 p.
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-12786DOI: doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0211-3ISI: 000252808500001OAI: diva2:179306
Available from: 2008-02-08 Created: 2008-02-08 Last updated: 2011-01-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hällsten, Martin
By organisation
The Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI)Department of Sociology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 42 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link