Abstract
Within academia, publishing in peer-reviewed journals is key to success and promotion and a pathway to leadership. Jamie Lundine, Ivy Lynn Bourgeault, and Dina Balabanova analyse the academic publishing sector, its systems, and the roles of editors and reviewers in supporting or undermining gender equity and offer recommendations for change.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abimbola, S. (2019). The foreign gaze: Authorship in academic global health. BMJ Global Health, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002068
Ali, P. A., & Watson, R. (2016). Peer review and the publication process. Nursing Open, 3(4), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.51
Allotey, P., Allotey-Reidpath, C., & Reidpath, D. D. (2017). Gender bias in clinical case reports: A cross-sectional study of the “big five” medical journals. PLoS One, 12(5), e0177386. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177386
Borja, A. (2015). Is there gender bias in the peer-review process in several Elsevier’s marine journals? Marine Pollution Bulletin, 96(1–2), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.05.046
Borsuk, R. M., Aarssen, L. W., Budden, A. E., Koricheva, J., Leimu, R., Tregenza, T., & Lortie, C. J. (2009). To name or not to name: The effect of changing author gender on peer review. Bioscience, 59(11), 985–989. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.10
Burnham, J. C. (1990). The evolution of editorial peer review. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 263(10), 1323–1329. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1990.03440100023003
Devine, P. G., Forscher, P. S., Cox, W. T. L., Kaatz, A., Sheridan, J., & Carnes, M. (2017). A gender bias habit-breaking intervention led to increased hiring of female faculty in STEMM Departments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 211–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.002
Dixon, N. (2001). Writing for publication—A guide for new authors. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 13(5), 417–421. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/13.5.417
Elsevier. (n.d.). What is peer review? Retrieved September 5, 2017, from https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/what-is-peer-review
European Institute for Gender Equality. (2016). Gender Equality in Academia and Research (GEAR) tool (p. 60). Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from http://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming
Farrell, P. R., Magida Farrell, L., & Farrell, M. K. (2017). Ancient texts to PubMed: A brief history of the peer-review process. Journal of Perinatology, 37(1), 13–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2016.209
Ford, E. (2015). Open peer review at four STEM journals: An observational overview. F1000Research, 6, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6005.2
Galipeau, J., Barbour, V., Baskin, P., Bell-Syer, S., Cobey, K., Cumpston, M., Deeks, J., Garner, P., MacLehose, H., Shamseer, L., Straus, S., Tugwell, P., Wager, E., Winker, M., & Moher, D. (2016). A scoping review of competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals. BMC Medicine, 14(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0561-2
Harding, S. G. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Cornell University Press.
Heidari, S., Babor, T. F., De Castro, P., Tort, S., & Curno, M. (2016). Sex and gender equity in research: Rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6
Helmer, M., Schottdorf, M., Neef, A., & Battaglia, D. (2017). Gender bias in scholarly peer review. eLife, 6, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21718
Hill Collins, P. (2002). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203900055
Hojat, M., Gonnella, J. S., & Caelleigh, A. S. (2003). Impartial judgment by the “gatekeepers” of science: Fallibility and accountability in the peer review process. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 8(1), 75–96. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022670432373
Lee, C. J., & Schunn, C. D. (2011). Social biases and solutions for procedural objectivity. Hypatia, 26(2), 352–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01178.x
Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G., & Cronin, B. (2013). Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22784
Leslie, K., Hopf, H. W., Houston, P., & O’Sullivan, E. (2017). Women, minorities, and leadership in anesthesiology: Take the pledge. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 124(5), 1394–1396. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000001967
Lundine, J., Bourgeault, I. L., Clark, J., Heidari, S., & Balabanova, D. (2018). The gendered system of academic publishing. The Lancet, 391(10132), 1754–1756. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30950-4
Lundine, J., Bourgeault, I. L., Glonti, K., Hutchinson, E., & Balabanova, D. (2019). “I don’t see gender”: Conceptualizing a gendered system of academic publishing. Social Science & Medicine, 235(August), 112388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112388
Manchikanti, L., Kaye, A. D., Boswell, M. V., & Hirsch, J. A. (2015). Medical journal peer review: Process and bias. Pain Physician, 18(1), E1–E14.
Moher, D., Goodman, S. N., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2016). Academic criteria for appointment, promotion and rewards in medical research: Where’s the evidence? European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 46(5), 383–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12612
Molassiotis, A., & Richardson, A. (2004). The peer review process in an academic journal. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 8(4), 359–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2003.11.005
Morgan, R., Lundine, J., Irwin, B., & Grépin, K. A. (2019). Gendered geography: An analysis of authors in The Lancet Global Health. The Lancet Global Health, 7(12), e1619–e1620. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30342-0
Noon, M. (2010). The shackled runner: Time to rethink positive discrimination? Work, Employment and Society, 24(4), 728–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017010380648
Publons. (2018). Global State Of Peer Review 2018. https://doi.org/10.14322/publons.GSPR2018
Razack, S. (2000). Your place or mine? Transnational feminist collaboration. In Anti-racist feminism: Critical race and gender studies (pp. 39–53). Fernwood.
Sidhu, R., Rajashekhar, P., Lavin, V. L., Parry, J., Attwood, J., Holdcroft, A., & Sanders, D. S. (2009). The gender imbalance in academic medicine: A study of female authorship in the United Kingdom. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 102(8), 337–342. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2009.080378
Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: A flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journals of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99, 178–182. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.99.4.178
Striphas, T. (2012). Performing Scholarly Communication. Text and Performance Quarterly, 32(1), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/10462937.2011.631405
The Editors of the Lancet Group. (2019). The Lancet Group’s commitments to gender equity and diversity. The Lancet, 394(10197), 452–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31797-0
The Lancet Global Health. (2018). Closing the door on parachutes and parasites. The Lancet Global Health, 6(6), e593. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30239-0
van Dalen, H. P., & Henkens, K. (2012). Intended and unintended consequences of a publish-or-perish culture: A worldwide survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(7), 1282–1293. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22636
Wall, S., Emmelin, M., Janlert, U., Mustonen, L., & Skog, B. (2006). Who submits to and publishes in this journal? A peer-review study of 772 manuscripts 2000–2004. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 34(4), 337–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/14034940600811465
Walsh, A., Brugha, R., & Byrne, E. (2016). “The way the country has been carved up by researchers”: Ethics and power in north-south public health research. International Journal for Equity in Health, 15(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-016-0488-4
Wei, Y., & Lei, L. (2018). Institution bias in the New England Journal of Medicine? A bibliometric analysis of publications (1997–2016). Scientometrics, 117(3), 1771–1775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2948-7
Wiley.com. (n.d.). The Peer Review Process | Wiley. Retrieved September 5, 2017, from https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/what-is-peer-review/the-peer-review-process.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lundine, J., Bourgeault, I.L., Balabanova, D. (2022). Academic Journal Publishing: A Pathway to Global Health Leadership. In: Morgan, R., Hawkins, K., Dhatt, R., Manzoor, M., Bali, S., Overs, C. (eds) Women and Global Health Leadership. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84498-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84498-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-84497-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-84498-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)