GENDER BIAS IN PEER REVIEW AND SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING
Although women had higher acceptance rates than men (60.4 vs. 56.4%), they submit papers, especially as first authors, less often than their male peers. Female first authors submitted an average of 1.8 manuscripts each, while males submitted 2.1 each from 2012-2015. Women were also used less often as reviewers (17.9% of the time) than expected based on their membership in the society and their rate as distinct accepted first authors (26.7% female) and all distinct accepted authors (23.3%). This difference is apparent regardless of age, but greatest in the youngest cohort of scientists. Additionally, female reviewers each did an average of 3.65 reviews from 2012-2015, which is less than the 4.34 reviews per male reviewer. The bias is a result of fewer suggestions of women reviewers especially by male authors and editors, and also a higher decline rate by women within each age cohort when asked to review. Participating as a reviewer can have important career benefits, especially for early career scientists; thus, addressing this bias is important for addressing pipeline issues and improving retention of women in the field. Comparison with other studies suggests that these results are general.