Equality is a quality! The assessment of sex and gender perspectives as a quality indicator

Abstract In recent years, sex and gender perspectives (SGPs) have been included as criteria for scientific quality alongside broader impact (BI) in the peer review of funding applications at major research funding institutions. This represents an extension of policy ambitions to include gender equality in the content of research. Critics have argued that this undermines scientific autonomy. However, there has been little research on the importance that reviewers assign to SGP in practice. In this study, we use a combination of quantitative and qualitative text analysis of written opinions of 347 successful grant proposals at the Swedish funding agency Forte, cross-checked against qualitative interviews with reviewers. It is argued that reviewers rhetorically (re-)draw boundaries between what is to be considered scientific and non-scientific. They can thus both respect funders’ inclusion of SGP and BI and only allow these to influence assessment when they cohere with researchers’ notions of quality.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science and Public Policy
Published
2025-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaf042
Primary Topic
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Equality is a quality! The assessment of sex and gender perspectives as a quality indicator

Jakob Lundgren, Johan Söderberg, Vanja Carlsson
Science and Public Policy
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
article

Equality is a quality! The assessment of sex and gender perspectives as a quality indicator

Jakob Lundgren, Johan Söderberg, Vanja Carlsson
article en

Abstract

Abstract In recent years, sex and gender perspectives (SGPs) have been included as criteria for scientific quality alongside broader impact (BI) in the peer review of funding applications at major research funding institutions. This represents an extension of policy ambitions to include gender equality in the content of research. Critics have argued that this undermines scientific autonomy. However, there has been little research on the importance that reviewers assign to SGP in practice. In this study, we use a combination of quantitative and qualitative text analysis of written opinions of 347 successful grant proposals at the Swedish funding agency Forte, cross-checked against qualitative interviews with reviewers. It is argued that reviewers rhetorically (re-)draw boundaries between what is to be considered scientific and non-scientific. They can thus both respect funders’ inclusion of SGP and BI and only allow these to influence assessment when they cohere with researchers’ notions of quality.

Science and Public Policy
Halmstad University (SE), University of Gothenburg (SE)
Riksbankens Jubileumsfond
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Equality is a quality! The assessment of sex and gender perspectives as a quality indicator — Jakob Lundgren, Johan Söderberg, et al. · Science and Public Policy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS