Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Female grant applicants are equally successful when peer reviewers assess the science, but not when they assess the scientist

View ORCID ProfileHolly O. Witteman, View ORCID ProfileMichael Hendricks, Sharon Straus, Cara Tannenbaum
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/232868
Holly O. Witteman
1Associate Professor, Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, 1050 avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada, G1V 0A6
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Holly O. Witteman
Michael Hendricks
2Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, 1205 av du Docteur-Penfield, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, H3A 1B1
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michael Hendricks
Sharon Straus
3Professor, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Canada, M3B 2T9
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cara Tannenbaum
4Scientific Director, Institute for Gender and Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research,Ottawa, Canada, H3A 1W4
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Article Information

doi 
https://doi.org/10.1101/232868
History 
  • December 12, 2017.

Article Versions

  • You are currently viewing Version 1 of this article (December 12, 2017 - 14:45).
  • Version 2 (December 22, 2017 - 13:33).
  • Version 3 (January 19, 2018 - 18:47).
  • View Version 4, the most recent version of this article.
Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.

Author Information

  1. Holly O. Witteman, PhD1,
  2. Michael Hendricks, PhD2,
  3. Sharon Straus, MD FRCPC MSc HBSc3 and
  4. Cara Tannenbaum, MD MSc4
  1. 1Associate Professor, Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, 1050 avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada, G1V 0A6
  2. 2Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, 1205 av du Docteur-Penfield, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, H3A 1B1
  3. 3Professor, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Canada, M3B 2T9
  4. 4Scientific Director, Institute for Gender and Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research,Ottawa, Canada, H3A 1W4
  1. Corresponding author: holly.witteman{at}fmed.ulaval.ca
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 12, 2017.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Female grant applicants are equally successful when peer reviewers assess the science, but not when they assess the scientist
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Female grant applicants are equally successful when peer reviewers assess the science, but not when they assess the scientist
Holly O. Witteman, Michael Hendricks, Sharon Straus, Cara Tannenbaum
bioRxiv 232868; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/232868
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Female grant applicants are equally successful when peer reviewers assess the science, but not when they assess the scientist
Holly O. Witteman, Michael Hendricks, Sharon Straus, Cara Tannenbaum
bioRxiv 232868; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/232868

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Scientific Communication and Education
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4122)
  • Biochemistry (8831)
  • Bioengineering (6536)
  • Bioinformatics (23494)
  • Biophysics (11818)
  • Cancer Biology (9235)
  • Cell Biology (13351)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7453)
  • Ecology (11432)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15183)
  • Genetics (10458)
  • Genomics (14057)
  • Immunology (9193)
  • Microbiology (22222)
  • Molecular Biology (8833)
  • Neuroscience (47674)
  • Paleontology (352)
  • Pathology (1432)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2493)
  • Physiology (3742)
  • Plant Biology (8099)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1438)
  • Synthetic Biology (2226)
  • Systems Biology (6046)
  • Zoology (1258)