How does bias show up in the publication process? According to a report published by Springer Nature this week, bias remains a widely experienced issue for researchers globally. 

Our new report, titled “Perceptions of fairness and bias in the scholarly publishing ecosystem: a global survey”, shares results from a global survey of more than 8,000 researchers on their perceptions of bias in publishing. It looks specifically at the types of bias researchers perceive throughout the publication process, how their perceptions of bias influence submission decisions, and the role of Publishers and Editors in providing solutions. 

What did we find? 

According to the report, perceptions of bias are widespread, with 91% of survey respondents believing that there is some degree of bias in academic publishing. Most (84%) researchers reported individual experiences of bias during the publishing process.  

• Region or country-related bias (62%) was reported as the most common form of bias, followed by institutional-affiliation bias (56%) and professional-network bias (55%) 
• 72% of researchers consider the possibility of bias when deciding where to submit their work for publication; 45% say it significantly influences where they publish 
• 91% of researchers expect clear policies and systems to address bias; 62% expect procedures to investigate instances of bias 
• Researchers believe that bias primarily occurs during the initial editorial assessment and decision about whether to send a manuscript out for peer review (71%) and the peer review process itself (64%) 

Why is this important in publishing? 

The report shows a strong consensus among researchers that bias is not only felt across the scholarly publishing ecosystem, but also influences submission decisions. Understanding researchers’ perceptions of the publication process and where bias might occur can ultimately help publishers and editors to address bias. 

Solutions to address bias 

The report highlighted that survey respondents want more training for Editors, to support them in recognising, managing, and mitigating bias. Over half of respondents want greater visibility into editorial decision processes and feel that reviewers should be provided with guidelines on how to minimise bias in peer review. Factors such as greater transparency and anonymisation could help to reduce bias due to affiliation, gender, or region.   

In summary, solutions to address bias in publishing may include: 

• Training  
• Increase transparency 
• Diversifying editorial teams 
• Language support 

They also underscore the importance of work already underway across Springer Nature. Since 2024, we’ve offered implicit bias training for journal and book Editors to help surface where bias can creep in and what practical steps can reduce its impact. The report also points to the positive impact of wider actions we’re taking, such as continuing efforts to increase regional diversity of external academic Editors, supporting training in peer review, increasing transparency through initiatives such as transparent peer review (now available across all Nature family journals and the BMC Series journals), and offering researchers language tools and services.  

A robust research ecosystem 

Although bias can be challenging to prove, the impact of researchers’ perceptions of bias, and how they impact publishing decisions, is significant. In undertaking the survey, Springer Nature aims to create a more robust research ecosystem for all. 

To find out more, read the full report here. You can also dig into more of the findings on The Researcher's Source.