‘Vague’ Language of Male Researchers Wins More Grants

A new study in Nature has found that grant reviewers favor vague and broad terminology used more often by men, despite the fact that proposals using those terms don’t produce better research. The study found that despite the use of blinded review for grants, gender discrimination against female applications takes place. The researchers studied grants submitted to the Gates Foundation from 2008-2017, and found that despite blinded review, female applicants receive significantly lower scores which cannot be explained by reviewer characteristics, proposal topics, or ex-ante measures of applicant quality. Instead, they found strong gender differences in the usage of broad and narrow words, suggesting that differing communication styles are a key driver of the gender score gap. Importantly, the higher reviewer scores for vague language did not predict higher innovative performance. Instead, female applicants exhibit a greater response in follow-on scientific output after an accepted proposal, relative to male applicants. According to the paper, titled, “Is Blinded Review Enough? How Gendered Outcomes Arise Even Under Anonymous Evaluation”, “Our results reveal that gender differences in writing and communication are a significant contributor to gender disparities in the evaluation of science and innovation.”
It’s been proven that diversity of individuals and ideas
leads to higher levels of productivity and better outcomes, especially in
innovation-driven organizations like science and technology.  Many organizations have implemented strategies
in order to minimize bias and maximize diversity. These strategies include
emphasizing objective measures of candidates’ ability and past performance,
building institutional support for equality, and increasing the diversity of
evaluators to name a few. Blinded review is another method to increase
diversity, and while blinded review and the other approaches are beneficial,
they fall short of fully eliminating biased evaluation. If the findings in the
sample of the Gates Foundation apply to the broader scientific and innovative
communities, it is likely that female innovators are systematically
under-funded relative to the quality of their ideas.

Previous articleStressing Classy CommunicationNext articleRight Brain Crucial to Language Success


'‘Vague’ Language of Male Researchers Wins More Grants' has no comments

Be the first to comment this post!

Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published.