Formanowicz Magdalena, Witkowska Marta, Hryniszak Weronika, Jakubik Zuzanna, Cisłak Aleksandra
Center for Research on Social Relations, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Scientometrics. 2023;128(4):2283-2299. doi: 10.1007/s11192-023-04639-z. Epub 2023 Feb 20.
Even though the majority of psychologists are women, they are outnumbered by men in senior academic ranks. One reason for this representation bias in academia is that men favor other men in decision-making, especially when the stakes are high. We tested the possibility of such bias in a bibliometric analysis, in which we coded editors' and authors' gender in regular and special issues, the latter considered of higher scientific prominence. We examined all special issues from five prominent scientific outlets in the fields of personality and social psychology published in the twenty-first century. Altogether, we analyzed 1911 articles nested in 93 sets comprising a special issue and a neighboring regular issue treated as a control condition. For articles published in special (but not regular) issues, when there were more men editors, more men first-authored and co-authored the work. This pattern suggests how gender bias can be perpetuated within academia and calls for revising the editorial policies of leading psychology journals.
尽管大多数心理学家是女性，但在高级学术职位中，男性的数量超过了女性。学术界这种代表性偏见的一个原因是，男性在决策时更倾向于其他男性，尤其是在风险很高的时候。我们在一项文献计量分析中测试了这种偏见的可能性，在该分析中，我们对常规和特刊中编辑和作者的性别进行了编码，后者被认为具有更高的科学影响力。我们研究了21世纪出版的人格与社会心理学领域五家著名科学出版社的所有特刊。我们总共分析了1911篇文章，这些文章嵌套在93组中，每组包括一个特刊和一个相邻的常规特刊作为对照条件。对于发表在特刊（而非常规特刊）上的文章，当男性编辑较多时，更多男性担任第一作者并参与共同撰写工作。这种模式表明了性别偏见在学术界是如何持续存在的，并呼吁修订主要心理学杂志的编辑政策。
