Researchers based in China face a persistent and substantial disadvantage in getting their work published in the world’s most influential science journals, according to an extensive new study of editorial decision-making.
The analysis of 110,303 manuscripts shows that the bias against researchers extends even to those based in the West but have Chinese-sounding names.
Researchers reviewed submissions to the journals Science and Science Advances between 2016 and 2020 and found that authors based in the US or Canada were accepted at 3.3 times the rate of those based in China, with acceptance rates of 8.3 per cent against just 2.5 per cent.
Using non-anonymised submission data, the study’s authors compared outcomes for authors with Chinese last names based in China against those based in the US, and for US-based authors with Chinese versus non-Chinese surnames. Those with Chinese last names and Chinese affiliations experienced worse outcomes at nearly every stage of review, at both journals.
The penalty did not shrink once a manuscript reached peer review; statistically, the disadvantage measured at the initial editorial screening stage was no different from the disadvantage that remained at final decision.
