Mind the (submission) gap: EPSR gender data and female authors publishing perceptions
- PDF / 980,435 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 21 Downloads / 172 Views
Mind the (submission) gap: EPSR gender data and female authors publishing perceptions Carlos Closa1 · Catherine Moury2 · Zuzana Novakova3 · Matt Qvortrup4 · Beatriz Ribeiro2
© European Consortium for Political Research 2020
Abstract The publication pattern of EPSR confirms the findings of established scholarship on gender and publishing; women publish less than men (roughly, 30% to 70%). This gap reflects a previous submission gap; i.e., men submit even much more than women do. EPSR editorial process does not show signs of discrimination: single or leading female authors have significantly lower desk rejection rates than their male counterparts in similar configurations. Women though, are underrepresented as peer reviewers and EPSR has taken measures to redress this situation. Looking at women authors perceptions, findings (that cannot be considered representative), are consistent with existing scholarship. Women authors perceive themselves as more perfectionist and more risk adverse, they also perceive that they can dedicate less time to research, and they express mistrust in the blind review process. As a general conclusion, whilst reversing the gender gap requires structural action beyond and before the editorial process, journal editors must consider forms to secure more extensive women inclusion in publications. Keywords Gender gap in publications · Political science women authors · Female reviewers
Introduction The EPSR defines itself as a generalist journal devoted to the most important debates in political science. The journal seeks to publish articles of the highest possible standards in conceptualization, theory and methodology. It should be self-evident that the gender of the authors and, more generally, gender as a topic should not a priori represent a significant obstacle for publication. Yet, as students of gender in neighboring disciplines, and the discipline of political science, have shown, * Carlos Closa [email protected] Extended author information available on the last page of the article Vol.:(0123456789)
C. Closa et al.
research often contains an implicit and often unconscious bias against women (Clain and Leppel 2018). Does this conclusion hold true as far as publishing at the EPSR is concerned? Anticipating the ECPR 2017 Gender Study and the 2018 Gender Plan, the current EPSR editorial team expressed its commitment to achieving gender balance in its bodies and outcomes. Thus, the renewal of the editorial board sought to achieve gender parity, and as a result, the board has consisted of fifteen female and an identical number of male scholars since 2017. The EPSR started to monitor systematically gender issues in 2016 focusing on submissions and published authors. This monitoring included the reviewers’ gender, and since 2019, we have implemented an active policy of recruiting female reviewers. The effects are yet to be measured and reviewed. This short article looks at patterns of gender submissions and publications during the first 10 years of life of the journal. The article
Data Loading...
