There is substantial evidence that systemic biases influence the scholarly peer review
process. Many scholars have advocated for double‐blind peer review (also known as …

Peer review is central to the scientific process and scientists' career advancement, but bias
at various stages of the review process disadvantages some authors. Here we use peer …

The productivity and performance of men is generally rated more highly than that of women
in controlled experiments, suggesting conscious or unconscious gender biases in …

The fairness of scholarly peer review has been challenged by evidence of disparities in
publication outcomes based on author demographic characteristics. To assess this, we …

The robustness of scholarly peer review has been challenged by evidence of disparities in
publication outcomes based on author's gender and nationality. To address this, we …

This study explores the use of PubPeer by the scholarly community, to understand the
issues discussed in an online journal club, the disciplines most commented on, and the …

Research on innovation and sustainability is prolific but fragmented. This study integrates
the research on innovation in management and business and STEM fields for sustainability …

This article addresses the growing movement towards greater diversity, equity and
inclusivity (DEI) within the research community. We present the case for increasing DEI …

Although the scientific peer review process is crucial to distributing research investments,
little has been reported about the decision-making processes used by reviewers. One key …

Providing and receiving feedback are crucial elements of any learning exchange and are an
intrinsic part of cultivating disciplinary dialogic culture. While there is considerable scholarly …