Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.The Pipeline Still Leaks and More Than You Think: A Status Report on Gender Diversity in Biomedical Engineering
Naomi C. Chesler et al.
ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING (2010)
Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields
Stephen J. Ceci et al.
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE (2010)
Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30 year examination
Jonathan Wai et al.
INTELLIGENCE (2010)
To Name or Not to Name: The Effect of Changing Author Gender on Peer Review
Robyn M. Borsuk et al.
BIOSCIENCE (2009)
Re-addressing gender bias in Cortex publications
Joanna Brooks et al.
CORTEX (2009)
Men and Things, Women and People: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Differences in Interests
Rong Su et al.
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN (2009)
Women's Underrepresentation in Science: Sociocultural and Biological Considerations
Stephen J. Ceci et al.
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN (2009)
Spatial Ability for STEM Domains: Aligning Over 50 Years of Cumulative Psychological Knowledge Solidifies Its Importance
Jonathan Wai et al.
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY (2009)
Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches
Herbert W. Marsh et al.
REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH (2009)
Work Preferences, Life Values, and Personal Views of Top Math/Science Graduate Students and the Profoundly Gifted: Developmental Changes and Gender Differences During Emerging Adulthood and Parenthood
Kimberley Ferriman et al.
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY (2009)
Do Masculine Names Help Female Lawyers Become Judges? Evidence from South Carolina
Bentley Coffey et al.
AMERICAN LAW AND ECONOMICS REVIEW (2009)
SOCIOLOGY The Gender Gap in NIH Grant Applications
Timothy J. Ley et al.
SCIENCE (2008)
Journal review and gender equality: a critical comment on Budden et al.
Robert J. Whittaker
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION (2008)
Response to Webb et al.:: Double-blind review:: accept with minor revisions
Amber E. Budden et al.
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION (2008)
Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors
Amber E. Budden et al.
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION (2008)
Does double-blind review benefit female authors?
Thomas J. Webb et al.
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION (2008)
Improving the peer-review process for grant applications - Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability
Herbert W. Marsh et al.
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST (2008)
Persistent nepotism in peer-review
Ulf Sandstrom et al.
SCIENTOMETRICS (2008)
Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis
Lutz Bornmann et al.
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS (2007)
No credit where credit is due: Attributional rationalization of women's success in male-female teams
ME Heilman et al.
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY (2005)
Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions
L Bornmann et al.
SCIENTOMETRICS (2005)
Gender bias in the refereeing process?
T Tregenza
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION (2002)
Men and women at promise for scientific excellence: Similarity not dissimilarity
D Lubinski et al.
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE (2001)
Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of blind auditions on female musicians
C Goldin et al.
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW (2000)
Share Paper
