Table 2 Respondent characteristics.
From: Exploring reviewer self-assessment in the context of academic peer review
Editors (n = 51) | Reviewers (n = 93) | All (n = 144) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | ||||
Female | 17 (33.3%) | 23 (33.3%) | 40 (27.8%) | |
Male | 34 (66.7%) | 70 (66.7%) | 104 (72.2%) | |
Location | ||||
Africa | 2 (3.9%) | 4 (4.3%) | 6 (4.2%) | |
Asia | 2 (3.9%) | 4 (4.3%) | 6 (4.2%) | |
Europe | 32 (62.7%) | 53 (57%) | 85 (59%) | |
America | 15 (29.5%) | 32 (34.4%) | 47 (33.0%) | |
Age | ||||
< 29 | 0 (0%) | 4 (4.3%) | 4 (2.8%) | |
30–39 | 6 (11.8%) | 16 (17.2%) | 22 (15.3%) | |
40–49 | 22 (43.1%) | 31 (33.3%) | 53 (36.8%) | |
50–59 | 17 (33.3%) | 34 (36.6%) | 51 (35.4%) | |
> 60 | 6 (11,76%) | 8 (8,60%) | 14 (9.7%) | |
Research Area | ||||
Computer Science & Information Systems | 36 (70.6%) | 68 (73.1%) | 104 (72.2%) | |
Engineering | 5 (9.8%) | 13 (14%) | 18 (12.5%) | |
Mathematics and Statistics | 2 (3.9%) | 2 (2.2%) | 4 (2.8%) | |
Social Sciences | 3 (5.9%) | 2 (2.2%) | 5 (3.5%) | |
Other | 2 (3.9%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (1.4%) | |
