Equitable peer review goes beyond traditional unbiased-reviewer norms to address documented disparities: under-citation of Global-South work; English-language bias in reviewer comments; reviewer geographic concentration; preferential treatment of authors from elite institutions; and editorial-board demographic skew. Practical actions include geographic-diverse reviewer pools, language-support resources for non-native-English authors, double-blind or open review variants chosen to mitigate bias, editorial-board diversity targets, and transparent reporting of reviewer and author demographics.
References
- Helmer M et al. 'Gender bias in peer review' eLife 2017. Lerback J, Hanson B 'Journals invite too few women to referee' Nature 2017. C4DISC Joint Statement of Principles.