Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.

Peer-reviewed publication volume and caliber are widely-recognized proxies for academic merit, and a strong publication record is essential for academic success and advancement. However, recent work suggests that publication productivity for particular author groups may also be determined in part by...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kezia R Manlove, Rebecca M Belou
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5805316?pdf=render
id doaj-0bb6e1b03513491bacca3493cfd4db8a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0bb6e1b03513491bacca3493cfd4db8a2020-11-25T02:45:02ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01132e019248110.1371/journal.pone.0192481Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.Kezia R ManloveRebecca M BelouPeer-reviewed publication volume and caliber are widely-recognized proxies for academic merit, and a strong publication record is essential for academic success and advancement. However, recent work suggests that publication productivity for particular author groups may also be determined in part by implicit biases lurking in the publication pipeline. Here, we explore patterns of gender, geography, and institutional rank among authors, editorial board members, and handling editors in high-impact ecological publications during 2015 and 2016. A higher proportion of lead authors had female first names (33.9%) than editorial board members (28.9%), and the proportion of female first names among handling editors was even lower (21.1%). Female editors disproportionately edited publications with female lead authors (40.3% of publications with female lead authors were handled by female editors, though female editors handled only 34.4% of all studied publications). Additionally, ecological authors and editors were overwhelmingly from countries in the G8, and high-ranking academic institutions accounted for a large portion of both the published work, and its editorship. Editors and lead authors with female names were typically affiliated with higher-ranking institutions than their male peers. This description of author and editor features provides a baseline for benchmarking future trends in the ecological publishing culture.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5805316?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kezia R Manlove
Rebecca M Belou
spellingShingle Kezia R Manlove
Rebecca M Belou
Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Kezia R Manlove
Rebecca M Belou
author_sort Kezia R Manlove
title Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
title_short Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
title_full Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
title_fullStr Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
title_full_unstemmed Authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
title_sort authors and editors assort on gender and geography in high-rank ecological publications.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2018-01-01
description Peer-reviewed publication volume and caliber are widely-recognized proxies for academic merit, and a strong publication record is essential for academic success and advancement. However, recent work suggests that publication productivity for particular author groups may also be determined in part by implicit biases lurking in the publication pipeline. Here, we explore patterns of gender, geography, and institutional rank among authors, editorial board members, and handling editors in high-impact ecological publications during 2015 and 2016. A higher proportion of lead authors had female first names (33.9%) than editorial board members (28.9%), and the proportion of female first names among handling editors was even lower (21.1%). Female editors disproportionately edited publications with female lead authors (40.3% of publications with female lead authors were handled by female editors, though female editors handled only 34.4% of all studied publications). Additionally, ecological authors and editors were overwhelmingly from countries in the G8, and high-ranking academic institutions accounted for a large portion of both the published work, and its editorship. Editors and lead authors with female names were typically affiliated with higher-ranking institutions than their male peers. This description of author and editor features provides a baseline for benchmarking future trends in the ecological publishing culture.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5805316?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT keziarmanlove authorsandeditorsassortongenderandgeographyinhighrankecologicalpublications
AT rebeccambelou authorsandeditorsassortongenderandgeographyinhighrankecologicalpublications
_version_ 1724764559035596800