Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Christine CuskleyORCiD
This is the authors' accepted manuscript of an article that has been published in its final definitive form by Oxford University Press, 2019.
For re-use rights please refer to the publisher's terms and conditions.
A previous study of reviewing at the Evolution of Language conferences found effects that suggested that gender bias against female authors was alleviated under double-blind review at EvoLang 11. We update this analysis in two specific ways. First, we add data from the most recent EvoLang 12 conference, providing a comprehensive picture of the conference over five iterations. Like EvoLang 11, EvoLang 12 used double-blind review, but EvoLang 12 showed no significant difference in review scores between genders. We discuss potential explanations for why there was a strong effect in EvoLang 11, which is largely absent in EvoLang 12. These include testing whether readability differs between genders, though we find no evidence to support this. Although gender differences seem to have declined for EvoLang 12, we suggest that double-blind review provides a more equitable evaluation process.
Author(s): Cuskley CF, Roberts SG, Politzer-Ahles S, Verhoef T
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Journal of Language Evolution
Year: 2019
Online publication date: 12/10/2019
Acceptance date: 02/09/2019
Date deposited: 14/10/2019
ISSN (print): 2058-4571
ISSN (electronic): 2058-458X
Publisher: Oxford University Press
URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzz007
DOI: 10.1093/jole/lzz007
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
