[GI]對於Ramona Rea研究補助政策之回應
2017-9-17
以下有三個對於Ramona Rea研究的回應，Ramona Rea現職加拿大研究機構─Banting Research Foundation的執行主任，她正在找尋具有確保性別平衡政策的研究補助機構。若您對此議題有興趣，歡迎連繫：ramona@bantingresearchfoundation.ca
一、From Elizabeth Pollitzer
歐洲第九屆性別高峰會（Gender Summit 9）上，愛爾蘭科學研究基金會主任Mark Ferguson曾提及一個成功的案例，詳見其簡報：
詳參：http://www.gender-summit.com/attachments/article/1346/Ferguson_GS9Eu.pdf
二、From Holly J. Falk-Krzesinski
您可以在此找到研究資源：，此外另提供使用美國國家衛生研究院報告之評估研究報告：http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/can-fake-names-tease-out-nih-reviewer-bias
邀請各位參加Gender in the Global Research Landscape community reference group，以下為討論會中檢視的文章列表
1.Bagues, M., Sylos-Labini, M. & Zinovyeva, N. Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter? Am. Econ. Rev. 107,1207–1238 （2017）.
2.Boughton, S. Addressing bias in peer review. BioMed Central blog March 18, （2016）.
3.Camejo, A. Science and society: Together we can crush gender bias. CrossTalk Blog April 27, （2017）.
4.Cressey, D. Journals weigh up double-blind peer review. NatureJuly 15, （2014）.
5.Falk-Krzesinski, H. J. Implicit/Unconscious Bias in Peer Review References. Reference List （2017）.
6.Helmer, M., Schottdorf, M., Neef, A. & Battaglia, D. Gender bias in scholarly peer review. eLife 6, （2017）.
7.Helmer, M., Schottdorf, M., Neef, A. & Battaglia, D. Gender bias in scholarly peer review. Elife 6:e21718 （2017）. doi:10.7554/eLife.21718.001
8.Hengel, E. Publishing while Female Gender Differences in Peer Review Scrutiny. in Royal Economic Society’s Annual Conference（2017）. doi:10.1353/rhe.2004.0003
9.Jappelli, T., Nappi, C. A. & Torrini, R. Gender effects in research evaluation. Res. Policy 46, 911–924 （2017）.
10.Knezek, P. Implicit bias in astronomy. Nat. Astron. 1, 151 （2017）.
11.Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G. & Cronin, B. Bias in Peer Review. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 64, 2–17 （2013）.
12.Lerback, J. & Hanson, B. Journals invite too few women to referee. Nature January 26, 455–457 （2017）.
13.Litvina, L. & Maurer, A. C. As good as it gets? Peer review and its discontents. Science in the News Blog 1–9 （2017）. athttp://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/as-good-as-it-gets-peer-review-and-its-discontents/
14.Makunga, N. Women scientists lag in academic publishing, and it matters. The Conversation September, （2017）.
15.Neuman, N. How can scientific publishers combat implicit gender bias? CrossTalk Blog 1–8 （2017）. athttp://crosstalk.cell.com/blog/how-can-scientific-publishers-combat-implicit-gender-bias
16.Pinholster, G. Journals and funders confront implicit bias in peer review. Science （80-. ）. 352, 1067–1068 （2016）.
17.Richmond, G. To Advance Science, It’s Time to Tackle Bias. Live Science （2016）. athttp://www.livescience.com/55026-scientists-tackle-unconscious-bias.html
18.Rimmer, A. Avoiding unconscious bias. BMJ 4366, （2016）.
19.Ross, E. Gender bias distorts peer review across fields. NatureMarch 21, （2017）.
20.Sayer, E. Gender Bias and the Peer Review Process | Wiley. Wiley Exchanges September, （2016）.
21.Tricco, A. C. et al. Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review. PLoS Onee0169718 （2017）. doi:10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0169718
三、From Rachel Mahmud
建議可以參考聯合國基金會推動的全球乾淨爐具聯盟（Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves），該組織政策包含性別平衡並曾經獲獎。連絡資訊如下：
Senior Program Associate, Gender
Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves | United Nations Foundation
Tel: 202.864.5476
Website: cleancookstoves.org