Brunel University Research Archive(BURA) preserves and enables easy and open access to all
types of digital content. It showcases Brunel's research outputs.
Research contained within BURA is open access, although some publications may be subject
to publisher imposed embargoes. All awarded PhD theses are also archived on BURA.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/32771| Title: | A response to Granberg et al. (2024) |
| Authors: | Hengel, E |
| Issue Date: | 27-Jan-2026 |
| Publisher: | Center for Open Science |
| Citation: | Hengel, E. (2026) 'A response to Granberg et al. (2024)', OSF [preprint], January 27. [pp. 1 - 22]. doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/ZB73Y. |
| Abstract: | Forms part of the public project: Brodeur, Abel. 2026. “Reproduction of "publishing While Female: Are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review".” OSF. January 27. doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/ZB73Y. The full reproduction report is available under "Files". The author [Erin Hengel] responded in December 2024. The replicators' response and author's second response are also available under "Files" at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZB73Y . |
| Description: | In this response to Granberg et al. (2024), I explain my reasons for using the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid, Gunning Fog, SMOG and Dale-Chall readability scores in Hengel (2022). I also identify several errors in textstat, the program Granberg et al. (2024) use to calculate their scores. After correcting these errors, textstat’s gender readability gaps and p-values for the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid, Gunning Fog and SMOG scores are very similar to those reported in Hengel (2022). textstat also generates Dale-Chall gender readability gaps that are 62–79 percent of the Dale-Chall estimate from Hengel (2022) and remaining variation is entirely due to differences in the familiar word lists used by each program (e.g., textstat omits words such as “men’s” and “women’s” that are disproportionately found in female-authored papers). Meanwhile, Granberg et al. (2024)’s alternative scores either generate similarly-sized readability gaps or have been shown to be less powerful predictors of reading comprehension in adult reading material. I conclude by noting that Hengel (2022) neither relies on nor claims to rely on an assumption that readability scores predict scientific quality. |
| URI: | https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/32771 |
| DOI: | https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZB73Y |
| Other Identifiers: | ORCiD: Erin Hengel https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2039-3521 |
| Appears in Collections: | Dept of Economics and Finance Research Papers |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author Response Dec 2024.pdf | 195.51 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.