Review Reports - Perceiving Teaching Roles Through Biased Eyes: The Effects of Gender and Age

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I very much enjoyed reading this paper. The literature review is thorough and provided a good foundation for the study. The figures provided clarity on the methods and main findings. Overall, this manuscript makes an important contribution to the field. I have listed a few minor suggested changes below.

Line 52: A punctuation mark appears to be missing.

Please report Cohen’s d effect sizes for the t-tests.
Line 365: There is an extra space before the period.
Clarify which measures are explicit assessments of bias and which are implicit, both in the methods and remind the reader again in the results section.

Author Response

Au. We thank the reviewer for their positive feedback, as well as for their helpful comments and suggestions. Below, we address each specific comment and describe the corresponding changes made in response.

Line 52: A punctuation mark appears to be missing – Fixed

Please report Cohen’sd effect sizes for the t-tests. _ Fixed, see caption to Fig. 2
Line 365: There is an extra space before the period. - Fixed

Clarify which measures are explicit assessments of bias and which are implicit, both in the methods and remind the reader again in the results section. - In response, we have clarified which measures assess explicit versus implicit bias. Specifically, In the Methods section, we explicitly indicate which measures are explicit and which are implicit. In the Results section, each relevant subsection is now labelled with the type of bias in parentheses. Additionally, we occasionally remind the reader throughout the text which measure is being described. All changes are highlighted in yellow in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review your article Perceiving Teaching Roles Through Biased Eyes: The Effects of Gender and Age.

The paper makes a valuable contribution to the field, particularly in highlighting the relevance of gender and age in the perception of teaching roles. The study clearly presents the research problem and question, demonstrates coherence in relation to the selected methodology, and presents the data in a clear and pertinent manner.

While the article is explicit in acknowledging the limitations of the study, I believe it falls somewhat short in addressing the issue from an intersectional perspective. This is particularly relevant since such a perspective underpins, at least in part, the theoretical framework guiding the article. Incorporating this dimension would enrich the analysis and strengthen the overall contribution of the work.

Thank you once again for sharing your research.

Kind regards,
Reviewer

Author Response

Au. We thank the reviewer for highlighting the importance of an intersectional perspective. In response, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion to emphasise how combinations of age and gender (e.g., young women, older women) produce distinct, directionally different patterns of bias. We hope these changes sufficiently demonstrate the significance of our findings, showing how different groups face unique disadvantages in educational role evaluations—patterns that cannot be captured by examining age or gender alone. All changes are highlighted in yellow in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf