Evidence Review: Peer Review Bias in the Funding Process: Main Themes and Interventions

44% of the literature focuses on gender bias in the peer review process, half of which are from STEM.

18% of the literature concentrates on racial inequity.

14% of the literature examines institutional prestige.

Bias impacts the funding process throughout various stages:
o The funding call,
o Preparing applications,
o Preparing the review stage,
o The review stage, and
o Funding outcome.

Groups of scholars affected by bias in the funding process are:
o Women,
o Early career researchers,
o Disabled researchers,
o Racially minoritized researchers, and
o Researchers from less prestigious institutions.

Internal barriers within institutions lead to fewer submissions for funding from these underrepresented groups.

There is little evaluation of the interventions that funding councils used to counter biases, the reasoning behind them or their impact.

Funders often rely on scholars' readiness to objectively evaluate their own bias and willingness to be objective.

Advice or training to establish one's own views and/or to overcome harmful or self-reinforcing outcomes is scarce.

Most funder guidance documents request that reviewers don't consider journal-based metrics as the only means to measure impact.