bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/232868; this version posted March 2, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Female grant applicants are equally successful when peer reviewers assess the science, but not when they assess the scientist Holly O. Witteman, PhD1; Michael Hendricks, PhD2; Sharon Straus, MD FRCPC MSc HBSc3; Cara Tannenbaum, MD MSc4 1Associate Professor, Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, 1050 avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada, G1V 0A6 2Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, 1205 av du Docteur-Penfield, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, H3A 1B1 3Professor, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Canada, M3B 2T9 4Scientific Director, Institute for Gender and Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Canada, H3A 1W4 Corresponding author: Holly O. Witteman, 1050 avenue de la Médecine, Pavillon Ferdinand- Vandry, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada, G1V 0A6, telephone: 418.656.2131 x3981, fax: 418.656.2465, email:
[email protected] Keywords (MeSH terms): Peer Review, Research/methods; Sex Factors Keywords (non-MeSH terms): Gender Bias Running title: Gender Bias in Grant Review Word count: 3500 words bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/232868; this version posted March 2, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. ABSTRACT (299 words) Background: Previous research shows that men often receive more research funding than women, but does not provide empirical evidence as to why this occurs.