10.7910/DVN/HLWNGC Walker, Christina Christina Walker https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6591-2244 Oakland University Harvard Dataverse 2021 Social Sciences Walker, Christina Christina Walker Purdue University Towner, Terri Terri Towner Oakland University 2021-11-15 2021-11-19 349783 text/tab-separated-values 1.0 Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. There is a fair amount of research examining bias in the peer-review process and its influence on journal articles’ quality and political science content. However, there is limited research examining how students peer-review other undergraduate research for publication. To better understand the predictors of manuscript evaluations and build on prior literature, this study examines seven years of undergraduate peer evaluations submitted to the Pi Sigma Alpha Undergraduate Journal of Politics (2013-2020). Empirical analyses reveal that a peer reviewer’s prior service on the Editorial Board (i.e., experience) and race are consistently and significantly associated with manuscript evaluations. By examining how undergraduate peer-reviewers assess anonymized manuscripts, this research reveals potential biases in the political science peer-review process. Additionally, the benefits of undergraduate students taking part in the peer-review process are explored and discussed.