The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship

This study aims to identify the gender of researchers who published in Personality and Individual Differences (PAID) during the 2008-2016 period. Of a total of 12,137 authorships, gender could be identified in 11,023 (90.8%). Results show a slight gender imbalance in favor of men that tends to diminish throughout the years, almost reaching parity in the last three years. Data show that: a) gender asymmetry is greater in the number of authorships than in the number of authors (individuals), partly because men tend to publish in a wider range of years during the period studied; b) men are relatively overrepresented in the last (senior) position of the author by-line; and c) in relative terms, women tend to be concentrated in the last years of the period studied. Taken together, these three points suggest that age probably plays a role in the (slight) gender imbalance, as observed in other scientific fields. Regarding the scientific impact of contributors, no gender differences were found in the number of citations received.

INTRODUCTION This study analyzes the gender dynamics of the American Library Association’s SCHOLCOMM listserv in order to determine the accuracy of concerns expressed by participants in early 2016 regarding the dominance of male voices on the listserv. METHODS Utilizing the SCHOLCOMM listserv archive, openly available online, the authors analyzed metadata related to individual messages in order to create a comprehensive list of participants, which was then analyzed to determine gender identity. The authors utilized this information to correlate the frequency of new messages and replies sent to the list with the gender identity of participants. RESULTS While men represented 35% of the SCHOLCOMM list’s participants, they contributed over half of the messages sent to the listserv and two-thirds of those sent as replies on existing message threads. DISCUSSION The opinion of several SCHOLCOMM participants that male voices were overrepresented in listserv discussions proved to be true. The gender identity breakdown of those most active on the list may also influence the perceptions and/or behaviors of other listserv participants, however, and should be investigated further. CONCLUSION While this study substantiates the opinion of several listserv participants that male SCHOLCOMM participants account for a disproportionately large amount of listserv discussion, we argue that the dynamics of the listserv can and should be changed in order to better represent the participant population.

18"Despite women earning similar numbers of graduate degrees as men in STEM disciplines, they 19" are underrepresented in upper level positions in both academia and industry. Editorial board 20" memberships are an important example of such positions; membership is both a professional 21" honor in recognition of achievement and an opportunity for professional advancement. We 22" surveyed 10 highly regarded journals in environmental biology, natural resource management, 23"and plant sciences to quantify the number of women on their editorial boards and in positions of 24" editorial leadership (i.e., Associate Editors and Editors-in-Chief) from 1985-2013. We found that 25" during this time period only 16% of editorial board members were women, with more 26" pronounced disparities in positions of editorial leadership. Although the trend was towards 27" improvement over time, there was surprising variation between journals, including those with 28" similar disciplinary foci. While demographic changes in academia may reduce these disparities 29"over time, we argue journals should proactively strive for gender parity on their editorial boards. 30"This will both increase the number of women afforded the opportunities and benefits that 31" accompany board membership and increase the number of role models and potential mentors for 32" early-career scientists and students. 33"PeerJ PrePrints | http://dx.doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.369v3 | CC-BY 4.0 Open Access |