Women and Editorial Leadership of Scientific and Academic Journals: An Explorative Study

  • Mara Del BaldoEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


The gender balance/imbalance in the governance of academic journals tied to the different scientific areas (i.e., the editorial board composition) represents a rather under investigated topic among the literature stream on diversity in top academic positions. Starting from this premise, the work aims to detect the gender (im)balance within the most prestigious international journals of Accounting. After having traced the theoretical background, the research design includes the empirical investigation focused on the Accounting journals ranked in the list proposed by the Association of Business Schools (ABS) in 2015 and included in the Italian ANVUR list (2017). Results confirm the underrepresentation of women in the editorial team and leadership positions of Accounting journals, as it happens in other fields included among the STEMs (such as Medicine or Math) or non-STEM disciplines (i.e., Management and Marketing). The work has scientific implications since it points out the limited potential of women scholars in covering governing roles and gaining worldwide visibility. Editorial board membership is in fact both a professional honour in recognition of achievements and an opportunity for professional advancement. Under an operational and political perspective, it contributes to nurturing the debate on the presence of an insidious discrimination that is often not easily recognized.


Women Scientific journals Editorial board Editorial team Accounting 


  1. Addis, E., & Villa, P. (2003). The editorial boards of Italian Economics Journals: Women, gender, and social networking. Feminist Economics, 9(1), 75–91. Scholar
  2. Amrein, K., Langmann, A., Fahrleitner-Pammer, A., Pieber, T. R., & Zollner-Schwetz, I. (2011). Women underrepresented on editorial boards of 60 major medical journals. Gender Medicine, 8(6), 378–387. Scholar
  3. ANVUR. (2017). Agenzia Nazionale di Valutazione del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca (National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes). Area 13 Elenco delle riviste di classe A valido per tutti i settori concorsuali dell’area. Pubblicato il 12 Maggio 2017.Google Scholar
  4. Bagilhole, B. (2002). Challenging equal opportunities: Changing and adapting male hegemony in academia. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(1), 19–33. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baldarelli, M.G., Del Baldo, M., & Vignini, S. (2016a). Pink accounting in Italy: Cultural perspectives over discrimination and/or lack of interest. Meditari Accountancy Research, 24(2), 269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baldarelli, M.G., Del Baldo, M., & Vignini, S. (2016b). Disuguaglianza di genere nel contesto accademico e universitario in Italia: il contributo delle studiose di Economia Aziendale, in Paoloni P. (a cura di), I mondi delle donne. Percorsi interdisciplinari, Edicusano, Roma, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
  7. Baxter, J. E., & Wright, O. (2000). The glass ceiling hypothesis: A comparative study of the United States, Sweden, and Australia. Gender and Society, 14(2), 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beyer, J. (1978). Editorial policies and practices among leading journals in four scientific fields. Sociological Quarterly, 19, 68–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blum, D. E. (1991). Environment still hostile to women in academe: New evidence indicates. Chronicle of Higher Education, October 9: A1–A20.Google Scholar
  10. Borus, J. (2014). Editors and authors: Two halves of a whole. Academy Psychiatry, 38(2), 224–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Broadbent, J. (1995). The values of accounting and education: Some implications of the creation of visibilities and invisibilities’. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 6, 69–98.Google Scholar
  12. Broadbent, J. (1998). The gendered nature of ‘accounting logic’: Pointers to an accounting that encompasses multiple values. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 9, 267–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Broadbent, J. (2016). A gender agenda. Meditari Accountancy Research, 24(2), 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Broadbent, J., & Kirkham, L. (2008). Glass ceilings, glass cliffs or new worlds? Revisiting gender and accounting. Accounting and Accountability Journal, 21(4), 465–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cabanac, G. (2012). Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards: A scientometric study of 77 leading journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63, 977–996. Scholar
  16. Cabezas-Clavijo, A., Robinson-García, N., Escabias, M., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2013). Reviewers’ ratings and bibliometric indicators: Hand in hand when assessing over research proposals? PLoS ONE, 8(6), e68258. Scholar
  17. Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(8), 3157–3162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cho, A.H., Johnson, S.A., Schuman, C.E., Adler, J.M., Gonzalez, O., Graves, S.J., Huebner, J.R., Marchant, D.B., Rifai, S.W., Skinner, I., & Bruna, E.M. (2014). Women are underrepresented on the editorial boards of journals in environmental biology and natural resource management. PeerJ, 2, e542; PMID: 25177537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984). The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 2, 217–258.Google Scholar
  20. Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S., & Vanneman, R. (2001). The glass ceiling effect. Social Forces, 80(2), 655–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dambrin, C., & Lambert, C. (2006a). Le Plafond De Verre Dans Les Cabinets D’Audit—Questions Theoriques et Methodologiques, Post-Print halshs-00548047, Hal.Google Scholar
  22. Dambrin, C., & Lambert, C. (2006b). La Question du Genre en Compatibilité. Analyses Theoriques et Metodologiques, Les Cahiers de Recherche, No. 862, HEC Paris, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
  23. Dickersin, K., Fredman, L., Flegal, K.M., Scott, J.D., & Crawley, B. (1998). Is there a sex bias in choosing editors? Epidemiology journals as an example. JAMA, 280(3), 260–264. Scholar
  24. Drago, C., Amidani Aliberti, L., & Carbonai, D. (2014). Measuring gender differences in information sharing using network analysis: The case of the Austrian interlocking directorship network in 2009. Fondazione ENI Enrico Mattei Nota di Lavoro, 61, 1–26.Google Scholar
  25. European Commission. (2013). Gender in research and innovation. Statistics and indicators. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available at:
  26. European Commission. (2016). She figures 2015. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union, European Union.Google Scholar
  27. Fletcher, C., Boden, R., Kent, J., & Tinson, J. (2007). Performing women: The gendered dimensions of the UK new researcher economy. Gender, Work and Organization, 14(5), 434–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Forster, N. (2000). A case study of women academics’ views on equal opportunities, career prospects and work–family conflicts in a British university. Women in Management Review, 15(7), 316–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fox, M. F. (1991). Gender, environmental milieu, and productivity in science. In H. Zuckerman, J. R. Cole, & J. T. Bruer (Eds.), The outer circle: Women in the scientific community (p. 1991). New York, NY: WW Norton & Co Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Fox, C. W., Burns, C. S., & Meyer, J. A. (2016). Editor and reviewer gender influence the peer review process but not peer review outcomes at an ecology journal. Functional Ecology, 30(1), 140–153. Scholar
  31. Galley, H. F., & Colvin, L. A. (2013). Next on the agenda: Gender. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 111, 139–142. Scholar
  32. Genova, A., De Micheli, B., Zucco, F., Grasso, C., & Magri, B. (2014). Achieving gender balance at the top of scientific research. Guidelines and tools for institutional change. Rome: Genis Lab project, Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini.Google Scholar
  33. Gollins, C. E., Shipman, A. R., & Murrell, D. F. (2017, June 3). A study of the number of female editors-in-chief of dermatology journals. International Journal Women’s Dermatology, 3(4), 185–188. Scholar
  34. Goodman, J. S., Fields, D. L., & Blum, T. C. (2003). Cracks in the glass ceiling. In what kinds of organizations do women make it to the top? Group and Organization Management, 28(4), 475–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Granovetter, M. S. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Green, K. (1998). The gender composition of editorial boards in economics. Royal Economic Society Women’s Committee. Available at Accessed 29 Jan 2018.
  37. Hines, R. D. (1992). Accounting: Filling the negative space. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(3/4), 313–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hopwood, A. G. (1987). Accounting and gender: An introduction. Accounting Organization and Society, 12(1), 65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Keiser, J., Utzinger, J., & Singer, B. H. (2003). Gender composition of editorial boards of general medical journals. Lancet, 362, 1336. Scholar
  40. Kennedy, B. L., Lin, Y., & Dickstein, L. J. (2001, August). Women on the editorial boards of major journals. Academic Medicine, 76(8), 849–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kirkham, L. M. (1992). Integrating herstory and history in accountancy. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(3–4), 287–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lamp, J. W. (2007). Perceptions of gender balance of IS journal editorial positions. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 20, 124–133.Google Scholar
  43. Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science. Nature, 504(7479), 211–213. Scholar
  44. Lee, T. A. (1995, June). Shaping the US academic accounting research profession: The American Accounting Association and the social construction of a professional élite. Critical Perspective on Accounting, 241–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lee, T. A. (1997). The editorial gatekeepers of the accounting academy. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 10(1), 11–30. Scholar
  46. Lehman, C. (1992). “Herstory” in accounting: The first eighty years. Accounting Organization and Society, 17(3–4), 261–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Levy, J. (1987). Women’s leadership status in the American Public Health Association. American Journal of Public Health, 77, 1537–1538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Logan, D. (2016). The importance of a gender-balanced editorial team. Narrowing the gender gap begins with all of us Slow progress, pp. 1–3.
  49. Mauleón, E., Hillán, L., Moreno, L., Gómez, I., & Bordons, M. (2013). Assessing gender balance among journal authors and editorial board members. Scientometrics, 95(1), 87–114. Scholar
  50. Metz, I., & Harzing, A. W. (2009). Gender diversity in editorial boards of management journals. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 8(4), 540–557. Scholar
  51. Metz, I., & Harzing, A. W. (2012). An update of gender diversity in editorial boards: A longitudinal study of management journals. Personnel Review, 41(3), 283–300. Scholar
  52. Morton, M. J., & Sonnad, S. S. (2007). Women on professional society and journal editorial boards. Journal of the National Medical Association, 99(7), 764–771. PMID: 17668642.Google Scholar
  53. National Science Foundation. (2004). Gender differences in the careers of academic scientists and engineers (NSF Report 04-323). Arlington, USA.Google Scholar
  54. National Science Foundation. (2012). Doctorate recipients from U.S. universities: 2012 (NSF Report 14-305). Arlington, USA.Google Scholar
  55. Pan, Y., & Zhang, J. Q. (2013). The composition of the editorial boards of general marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Education, First Published September 11, 2013 Research 36(1), 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pearson, C. H., Mullen, R. W., Thomason, W. E., & Phillips, S. B. (2006). Associate editor’s role in helping authors and upholding journal standards. Agronomy Journal, 98, 417–422. Scholar
  57. Roberts, L. W. (2014). Where are the women editors? Academy Psychiatry, 38, 391–393. Scholar
  58. Sala, E. (2008). Donne, uomini e potere. Disuguaglianze di genere in azienda, politica, accademia. Milano: F.Angeli.Google Scholar
  59. Sala, E., & Bosisio, R. (2007). The role of formal and informal rules in Italian Academics’ careers. Are there equal opportunities for men and women? In: R. Siemienska & A. Zimmer (Eds.), Gendered career trajectories in academia in cross national perspective (pp. 129–160). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.Google Scholar
  60. Schrager, S., Bouwkamp, C., & Mundt, M. (2011, March). Gender and first authorship of papers in family medicine journals 2006–2008. Family Medicine, 43(3), 155–159.Google Scholar
  61. Siboni, B., Sangiorgi, D., Farneti, F., & de Villiers, C. (2016). Gender (in) accounting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Meditari Accountancy Research, Special Issue, 24(2), 158–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stark, B.L., Spielmann, K.A., Shears, B., & Ohnersorgen, M. (1997). The gender effect on editorial boards and in academia. Bulletin of the Society for American Archeology, 15(4). Available at Accessed 21 Jan 2018.
  63. Stegmaier, M., Palmer, B., & van Assendelft, L. (2011). Getting on the board: The presence of women in political science journal editorial positions. Political Science and Politics, 44(04), 799–804. Scholar
  64. Sugimoto, C. R., Ni, C., West, J. D., & Larivière, V. (2015). The academic advantage: Gender disparities in patenting’. PLoS ONE, 10(5), e0128000. Scholar
  65. Teghtsoonian, M. (1974). Distribution by sex of authors and editors of psychological journals, 1970–1972: Are there enough women editors? American Psychologist, 29(4), 262–269. Scholar
  66. Topaz, C. M., Sen, S., & Danforth, C. M. (2016). Gender representation on journal editorial boards in the mathematical sciences. PLoS ONE, 11(8), e0161357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2004). Academic motherhood: Managing complex roles in research universities. Review of Higher Education, 27(2), 233–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Williams, P. F., & Rogers, J. I. (1995, June). The accounting review and the production of accounting knowledge. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yeverino-Gutiérrez, M. L., González-González, M. d. R., Corral-Symes, R., & González-Santiago, O. (2017). Women as editors-in-chief of environmental science journals. F1000Research, 2017(6), 1167. doi: Scholar
  70. Zuckerman, H., Cole, J., & Bruer, J. (Eds.). (1991). The outer circle. Women in the scientific community. New York: Norton and Company.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Society and PoliticsUniversity of UrbinoUrbinoItaly

Personalised recommendations