📣 Instituting bias reporting mechanisms for PIs, reviewers, & staff to report anything that could affect the fairness of the review process

Want more?

Check out our webinar recording: How to Advocate for Fair Funding and Overcome Animal Methods Bias: www.animalmethodsbias.org/index.php/re...

🗣️ Informing reviewers and review staff about the value of human-based methods

🔎 Implementing proposal evaluation criteria to ensure that methods are assessed based on their suitability for the research question, context of use, translatability, and human relevance

⬇️

👥 Diversifying review groups to boost inclusion of #NAMs expertise—this can avoid potential reviewer preferences for animal-based methods and ensure that NAM-based proposals are adequately evaluated for rigor and model suitability

⬇️

Our comment detailed evidence of animal methods bias and suggested reforms to ensure it’s not a barrier to innovative human-based science, such as:

💡 Increasing awareness of animal methods bias through targeted training for grant reviewers and review staff

⬇️

Multiple U.S. agencies have now launched initiatives to advance human-based research approaches and reduce animal experimentation and testing. 🧪

A #PeerReview bias favoring animal use will hinder their success.

For government initiatives like these to be successful, and to help NAMs reach their full potential, barriers in peer review must be addressed.

By:
Kopew, Singer, Krebs ( @pcrm.org )
@ertrunnell.bsky.social, Vidaurre ( @peta.org )
Ritskes-Hoitinga ( @utrechtuniversity.bsky.social )

In it, we discuss:

⚖️ How #PeerReview bias can tilt the scales against #NAMs in grant & manuscript reviews.

🌎 How new US/UK initiatives may help reduce this bias (they’re a great start!).

🎯 What else is needed to address animal methods bias as the world moves away from animal experimentation

This webinar is part of the Animal-Free Workshop Series for Early-Career Researchers, hosted by @pcrm.org and @jhucaat.bsky.social.

🔗 Register here! 👉 us06web.zoom.us/webinar/regi...

By following these steps, editors can promote fairer, more objective review & help advance modern, nonanimal science.

Please share within your networks, especially among any editors or editorial board members you might know!

#SciPub #AcademicSky

Editors can:
✅ Flag reviewer suggestions for animal experiments
✅ Consider cost/time feasibility
✅ Ensure concerns about NAMs are evidence-based, not personal preference-based.
✅ Remove unsupported requests or advise ignoring them
✅ Focus on scientific quality & relevance.

Animal methods bias is a real problem, but simple editor intervention can make a big difference!

This bias can lead reviewers to suggest unnecessary animal experiments in otherwise nonanimal studies, pressuring authors to comply to secure publication.

The result❓

Delays, unjustified animal use, and slower adoption of innovative NAMs.

#AnimalMethodsBias is a #PeerReview bias characterized by a preference for animal-based research methods or a lack of expertise to properly evaluate new approach methodologies ( #NAMs ) and other nonanimal methods.

💡 We are working to change this experience for scientists & prevent the pressure Trunnell felt from her professor to conduct animal experiments just to get papers published.

🔍 Learn about some helpful strategies for overcoming animal methods bias in your own work at www.animalmethodsbias.org

📖 Learn more about this issue from our surveys:

doi.org/10.14573/alt...

doi.org/10.1016/j.na...

This #AnimalMethodsBias can result in unfair assessments of animal-free research.

Paired with the pressure to #PublishOrPerish, it can lead researchers to include animal experiments in their studies without scientific or ethical justification.

Sound familiar? Trunnell is not alone in this experience.

Advisors, reviewers, editors, or other peers sometimes expect or suggest animal experiments because they have personal preference for them or because they are unfamiliar with nonanimal methods.

When making a plan for her #PhD project, Trunnell recalls her professor telling her, “you’re going to want to do animal work because that’s what journals want to publish. You’ll have much less luck publishing papers if they’re only in vitro.”

www.whenwejustify.org/post/the-sci...