Inaugural winners of the Peer Prize for Women in Science
To be a catalyst for inspiring women researchers in Australia, we were very excited to host the the inaugural Peer Prize for women in science, supported by the Sun Foundation. It was the first time we had hosted a Peer model to award winners and we didn’t know what to expect. Here’s what happened…
Over a 4-week period, we received 40 inspiring research entries from across Australia. Although a video was not mandatory, most researchers took the time to create engaging video summaries about their research. Here’s a great example from Dr Kimberley Beaumont’s melanoma research at the Centenary Institute.
Australian entrants, global impact
The Peer Prize model allows individuals, local societies and organisations to drive global impact. After a 10 day researcher verification and voting period, we had over 50,000 unique views & 1,474 of some the world’s top researchers from 250 different research organisations across the world vote on the awards.
Peer prizes allow research organisations to drive global learning & collaboration across fields in order to facilitate new ideas and pathways for research projects. Of the 1,474 verified researchers that voted, some 125 different fields were represented. Our most representative fields were Marine Ecology/Biology (205), Cell Biology (202), Ecology (133), Genetics (122), Engineering (106), Immunology (89) & Oceanography (88).
Top-5 for the Life Science Prize
We were amazed at the level of peer support during the voting period with 37 peers voting on average for each entry. Congratulations to everyone — here are the top 5 entries with each receiving 50 or more from top researchers across the world!
1st with 224 votes
2nd with 194 votes
3rd with 107 votes
4th with 96 votes
5th with 80 votes
Top-5 of the Earth, Environmental & Space Science Prize
1st with 183 votes
2nd with 166 votes
3rd with 64 votes
4th with 63 votes
5th with 49 votes
We thank everyone for being involved and congratulations to the winners! Being a completely new concept coupled with the overwhelming response from new researchers wanting to be part of it proved challenging during the voting process, since we had to manually verify researchers before they could vote in the Peer Prize. We have learnt alot from our first Peer Prize and wanted to thank everyone for their patience as we verified researchers. I also want to thank our volunteers (Joe & Nat) for helping too.
Manual verification assures fairness & quality but can be frustrating for those who tried & couldn’t take part in this inaugural Peer Prize. We are very keen to hear ideas from the community on how to make the verification process more streamlined as we launch new Peer Prize awards for labs, societies and organisations across the world. If you have any suggestions please send through your ideas to email@example.com.
Dr Ben McNeil
Chief Scientist, Thinkable.org