Bias in peer evaluations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicky Nicholls
Keyword(s):  
Peer Evaluations

Adolescent Voice Quality Aberrations: Personality and Social Status

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 576-582 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Muma ◽  
Ronald L. Laeder ◽  
Clarence E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Voice Quality ◽  
Personality Characteristics ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Adolescent Voice

Seventy-eight subjects, identified as possessing voice quality aberrations for six months, constituted four experimental groups: breathiness, harshness, hoarseness, and nasality. A control group included 38 subjects. The four experimental groups were compared with the control group according to personality characteristics and peer evaluations. The results of these comparisons indicated that there was no relationship between voice quality aberration and either personality characteristics or peer evaluations.

scholarly journals “Teach more, but do not expect any applause”: Are Women Doubly Discriminated Against in Universities’ Recruitment Processes?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Brommesson ◽  
Gissur Ó Erlingsson ◽  
Jörgen Ödalen ◽  
Mattias Fogelgren
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
The Other ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Other Hand

Abstract Studies repeatedly find that women and men experience life in academia differently. Importantly, the typical female academic portfolio contains less research but more teaching and administrative duties. The typical male portfolio, on the other hand, contains more research but less teaching and administration. Since previous research has suggested that research is a more valued assignment than teaching in academia, we hypothesise that men will be ranked higher in the peer-evaluations that precede hirings to tenured positions in Swedish academia. We analyze 861 peer review assessments of applicants in 111 recruitment processes in Economics, Political Science, and Sociology at the six largest Swedish universities. Our findings confirm that the premises established in previous research are valid in Sweden too: Women have relatively stronger teaching merits and men relatively stronger research merits, and also that, on balance, research is rewarded more when applicants are ranked by reviewers. Accordingly, male applicants are ranked higher compared to female applicants.

Attrition of police officers as predicted by peer evaluations during academy training

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne M. Meier ◽  
Timothy J. Arentsen ◽  
Luann Pannell ◽  
Katharine M. Putman
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Academy Training

Surgical resident peer evaluations—What have we learnt

2007 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-71
Author(s):  
V.K. Maker ◽  
M.B. Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Resident ◽  
Peer Evaluations

scholarly journals When Group Work Doesn’t Work: Insights from Students

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. ar52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yunjeong Chang ◽  
Peggy Brickman
Keyword(s):  
Student Perceptions ◽  
Group Work ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Peer Ratings ◽  
College Science ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Support Strategies ◽  
The Social ◽  
Low Performance ◽  
Depth Interviews

Introducing group work in college science classrooms can lead to noticeable gains in student achievement, reasoning ability, and motivation. To realize these gains, students must all contribute. Strategies like assigning roles, group contracts, anonymous peer evaluations, and peer ratings all encourage student participation. In a class using these strategies, we conducted in-depth interviews to uncover student perceptions of group work in general and the utility of these support strategies. Students in both high- and low-performance groups still complained of unequal contributions while praising the social support provided by groups. Students who scored highly on tests were more likely to recognize the benefits of group work, regardless of their groups’ overall performance levels, while lower-scoring students perceived group work as time-consuming “busy work” with little cognitive benefit. Comments from anonymous peer evaluations differed only subtly between high- and low-performance groups. Numerical ratings on these evaluations did correlate with overall group performance. However, students in lower-performance groups assigned harsh ratings to their low-scoring members, while students in higher-performance groups were more generous in their ratings for low-scoring members. We discuss implications of relying on support strategies for promoting productive group work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document