#GoodRead | Fiona Ingleby Spoke Out About a Sexist Peer Review, and Now PLoS Is Taking Action

Fiona Ingleby, in response to a sexist review of an article on gender differences she submitted to an academic journal for consideration, took to Twitter to open up discussion about the problem: 

"It’s a man’s world — for one peer reviewer, at least" —

We’ve written quite a lot about the perks and pitfalls of the peer review system, but one thing we never really touched on was the risk that a reviewer might be … well, not to put too fine a point on it: a dope.

But Fiona Ingleby can speak to that. Ingleby, a postdoc in evolutionary genetics at the University of Sussex in the United Kingdom, co-wrote an article on gender differences in the transition from PhD-dom to postdoc land and submitted it to a journal for consideration. What she heard back was lamentably ironic — and grossly sexist.

After taking her complaint to Twitter, PLoS, the larger family to which the previously unnamed journal belongs, has responded:

"PLOS ONE Update on Peer Review Process" —

We have formally removed the review from the record, and have sent the manuscript out to a new editor for re-review. We have also asked the Academic Editor who handled the manuscript to step down from the Editorial Board and we have removed the referee from our reviewer database.

Fiona Ingleby spoke out publicly about the faulty peer review process at PLoS, one that directly affects not only her career but those of other women, as well, and it looks like real change is coming of it.

Go, Fiona!