Numerous studies show that gender-based bias affects the distribution of research funding, with researcher-focused assessments being particularly prone to bias. Considering the negative impact on science when bias intrudes on funding decisions, granting agencies need to improve their efforts to document, monitor and reduce it.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Wittman, H. O., Hendricks, M., Straus, S. & Tannenbaum, C. Are gender gaps due to evaluations of the applicant or the science? A natural experiment at a national funding agency. Lancet 393, 531–40 (2019).
Hipólito, J., Shirai, L. T. & Diele-Viegas, L. M. et al. Brazilian budget cuts further threaten gender equality in research. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01640-8 (2021).
Lincoln, A. E., Pincus, S., Koster, J. B. & Leboy, P. S. The matilda effect in science: awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and 2000s. Soc. Stud. Sci. 42, 307–320 (2012).
Tamblyn, R., Girard, N., Qian, C. J. & Hanley, J. Assessment of potential bias in research grant peer review in Canada. CMAJ 190, E489–E499 (2018).
Guglielmi, G. Gender bias tilts success of grant applications. Nature 554, 14–15 (2018).
Adam, D. Science funders gamble on grant lotteries. Nature 575, 574–575 (2019).
Wennerås, C. & Wold, A. Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature 387, 341–343 (1997).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The author declares no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Crudden, C.M. Gender equity in funding. Nat Rev Chem 6, 233–234 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-022-00376-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-022-00376-8
- Springer Nature Limited