Causal Analysis of Author Demographics in Academic Peer Review
Uttamasha Anjally Oyshi, Gibson Nkhata, Susan Gauch

TL;DR
This study uses causal inference to reveal significant biases against minority race, gender, and geographic location in academic peer review, highlighting the need for fairness interventions to promote equity.
Contribution
It introduces a causal analysis framework to quantify the independent effects of author demographics on paper acceptance, revealing biases in peer review processes.
Findings
Authors from minority racial groups face a -0.42 ranking disadvantage.
Female authors experience a -0.25 ranking effect.
Authors from the Global South face a -0.57 ranking disadvantage.
Abstract
Academic meritocracy is jeopardized by systematic imbalances; for example, whereas Black and Hispanic individuals constitute over 30% of the U.S. population, they represent fewer than 10% of tenured academics in science and engineering. Peer review serves as a crucial gatekeeper in this process, however it encounters ongoing issues over biases that may hinder scientific advancement. The issue is now exacerbated by the growing influence of artificial intelligence (AI) in academic assessment. This paper transcends correlation to quantitatively assess the independent impacts of author demographics, including race, gender, and country of affiliation, on paper acceptance rankings. We utilize a causal inference methodology on a dataset of 530 papers, simulating the academic selection process by employing the prestige of the publication venue as a surrogate for review rank. Our research…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
Topicsscientometrics and bibliometrics research · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
