Gender gaps in the peer review process. Different sources in the evaluation process for the allocation of grants in Argentina

Abstract This paper examines gender gaps in three dimensions of peer review for research grant allocation: relevance, feasibility, and academic background of researchers. The empirical analysis focuses on the Argentinean PICT grant program during 2019–21. Results reveal that female researchers receive lower scores than their male counterparts across all evaluated dimensions. The gender scoring gap is most pronounced among young researchers, particularly in the evaluation of academic background. The evidence suggests that S&T programs aimed at strengthening the scientific system may disproportionately benefit male researchers, particularly in the early stages of their careers. Consequently, horizontal S&T policies that lack a gender perspective risk reinforcing existing barriers to women’s advancement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Evaluation
Published
2024-12-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaf048
Citations
1
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.46
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gender gaps in the peer review process. Different sources in the evaluation process for the allocation of grants in Argentina

Florencia Fiorentin, Diana Suárez
1 citations
Research Evaluation
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
0.46
article

Gender gaps in the peer review process. Different sources in the evaluation process for the allocation of grants in Argentina

Florencia Fiorentin, Diana Suárez
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines gender gaps in three dimensions of peer review for research grant allocation: relevance, feasibility, and academic background of researchers. The empirical analysis focuses on the Argentinean PICT grant program during 2019–21. Results reveal that female researchers receive lower scores than their male counterparts across all evaluated dimensions. The gender scoring gap is most pronounced among young researchers, particularly in the evaluation of academic background. The evidence suggests that S&T programs aimed at strengthening the scientific system may disproportionately benefit male researchers, particularly in the early stages of their careers. Consequently, horizontal S&T policies that lack a gender perspective risk reinforcing existing barriers to women’s advancement.

Research EvaluationVol. 34
National University of General Sarmiento (AR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
0.46
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.