US and non-US submissions : An analysis of reviewer bias.
International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, CZE, 1997/09.
Reviewers increasingly are asked to review manuscripts from outside their own country, but whether they are more likely to recommend acceptance of such manuscripts is not known.
To assess whether US reviewers or non-US reviewers evaluate manuscripts differently, depending on whether the manuscripts are submitted from outside the United States or from the United States.
Design and Setting
A retrospective analysis of all original submissions received by Gastroenterology in 1995 and 1996.
Reviewers ranked manuscripts in 4 decision categories : accept, provisionally accept, reject with resubmission, or reject.
Main Outcome Measure
Ranking of papers based on nationality of authors and reviewers.
The percentage of non-US manuscripts placed in each decision category by US (n=2355) and non-US reviewers (n=1297) was nearly identical (P=31).
However, US reviewers recommended acceptance of papers submitted by US authors more often than did non-US reviewers (P=001).
Non-US reviewers ranked US papers slightly more favorably than non-US papers (P=09), while US reviewers ranked US papers much more favorably (P=001).
Reviewers from the United States and outside the United States evaluate non-US papers similarly and evaluate papers submitted by US authors more favorably, with US reviewers having a significant preference for US papers.
Mots-clés Pascal : Article, Médecine, Analyse, Influence, Nationalité, Critère, Sélection, Etats Unis, Amérique du Nord, Amérique, Homme, Littérature scientifique, Américain
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Article, Medicine, Analysis, Influence, Nationality, Criterion, Selection, United States, North America, America, Human, Scientific literature
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0445260
Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 25/01/1999.