Abstract
Publication citation impact can be an essential metric in deciding tenure and promotion, but studies have shown that historically women are cited less than men, despite equal or greater output of publications. While these metrics were created in an effort to be objective and fair, they ultimately fail to reach their promise when citations continue to be gendered and biased, even unintentionally. This case study examines the relationships of gender to publication and citation within two international environmental science and studies journals, the Journal of Environmental Studies (JESS) and Environment and Society (E&S). These journals were selected for their interdisciplinary focus as well as their purposeful inclusion of international authors, demonstrating that disproportionate citation by gender is not a disciplinary or geographic issue, but more generally pervasive in academia. Systematically reviewing the gender of authors in these journals against the gender of the authors cited allows for an examination of the power dynamics that ultimately have a deep influence on an individual author’s perceived merit and ultimate academic success. Our study found that despite a relatively close ratio of female and male-identified authors in these journals, male-identified authors were much more highly cited within the scholarship by all authors. This review demonstrates that despite the implementation of blind peer review processes, challenges continue for equity within the cited scholarship. We hope this study contributes to the field of the environmental sciences being able to meaningfully address disproportionate representation by beginning concretely with tracking its own citation politics through reflexivity and an equity mindset.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agarwal B (2000) Conceptualising environmental collective action: why gender matters. Camb J Econ 24(3):283–310
Aksnes DW, Langfeldt L, Wouters P (2019) Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: an overview of basic concepts and theories. SAGE Open 9(1):2158244019829575
Andersen JP, Mathias WN (2018) Google Scholar and Web of Science: examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines. J Informet 12(3):950–959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.07.010
Arun P, Lorello GR (2019) Representation of female authors in the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia: a retrospective analysis of articles between 1954 and 2017. Can J Anesth 66(5):495–502
Barnes C (2017) The h-index debate: an introduction for librarians. J Acad Librariansh 43(6):487–494
Barnett K (2019) Citation as a measure of ‘impact’: female legal academics at a disadvantage? Altern Law J 44(4):267–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969x19874847
Beel J, Gipp B, Wilde E (2010) Academic search engine optimization (ASEO) optimizing scholarly literature for Google Scholar & Co. J Sch Publ 41(2):176–190
Bird KS (2011) Do women publish fewer journal articles than men? Sex differences in publication productivity in the social sciences. Br J Sociol Educ 32(6):921–937. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2011.596387
Borsuk RM, Budden AE, Leimu R, Aarssen LW, Lortie CJ (2009) The influence of author gender, national language and number of authors on citation rate in ecology. Open Ecol J 2(1):25–28. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874213000902010025
Brown NE et al (2020) Gender gaps in perceptions of political science journals. PS Polit Sci Polit 53(1):114–121
Budrikis Z (2020) Growing citation gender gap. Nat Rev Phys 2(7):346–446. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-020-0207-3
Cameron EZ, White AM, Gray ME (2016) Solving the productivity and impact puzzle: do men outperform women, or are metrics biased? Bioscience 66(3):245–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biv173
Caplar N, Tacchella S, Birrer S (2017) Quantitative evaluation of gender bias in astronomical publications from citation counts. Nat Astron 1(6):0141. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-017-0141
Ceci SJ et al (2014) Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychol Sci Public Interest 15(3):75–141
Chibnik M (2014) Gender and citations. American Anthropologist 116 (3) https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.12117
Conley D, Stadmark J (2012) A call to commission more women writers. Nature 488(7413):590–590
Diekman AB, Steinberg M, Brown ER, Belanger AL, Clark EK (2016) A goal congruity model of role entry, engagement, and exit: understanding communal goal processes in STEM gender gaps. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 21(2):142–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683166421418
Dion ML, Sumner JL, Mitchell SM (2018) Gendered citation patterns across political science and social science methodology fields. Polit Anal 26(3):312–327. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.12
Downie D, Bernstein J (2019) Case studies in the environment: an analysis of author, editor, and case characteristics. Case Stud Environ 3(1):1–10
Downie D et al (2018) The first 6 years of JESS: categorizing authors and topics. J Environ Stud Sci 8(3):371–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-017-0448-3
Dworkin JD, Linn KA, Teich EG, Zurn P, Shinohara RT, Bassett DS (2020) The extent and drivers of gender imbalance in neuroscience reference lists. Nat Neurosci 23(8):918–926
Ferber MA (1986) Citations: are they an objective measure of scholarly merit?. Signs: J Women Cult Soc 11(2):381–389
Ferber MA (1988) Citations and networking. Gender Soc 2(1):82–89
Fowler J, Aksnes D (2007) Does self-citation pay?. Scientometrics 72(3):427–437
Geraci L, Balsis S, Busch AJ (2015) Gender and the h index in psychology. Scientometrics 105(3):2023–2034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1757-5
Goldstone K et al (2020) Peer review for the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia in 2016 and 2017: a retrospective analysis by reviewer and author gender. Can J Anesth 67(3):336–342
Håkanson M (2005) The impact of gender on citations: an analysis of College & Research Libraries, Journal of Academic Librarianship, and Library Quarterly. Coll Res Libr 66(4):312–323. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.66.4.312
Heath-Stout L (2020) Guest editorial introduction: gender, equity, and the peer review process at the Journal of Field Archaeology. J Field Archaeol 45(3):135–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2020.1719295
Hengel E (2022) Publishing while female: are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review. Econ J 132(648):2951–2991. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueac032
Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102(46):16569–16572
Huang J, Junming GAJ, Sinatra R, Barabási AL (2020) Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proc Natl Acad Sci 117(9):4609–4616. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1914221117
Kim HJ, Grofman B (2019) Job mobility, tenure, and promotions in political science PhD-granting departments, 2002–2017: cohort, gender, and citation-count effects. Polit Sci Polit 52(4):684–90. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096519000490
King MM, Bergstrom CT, Correll SJ, Jacquet J, West JD (2017) Men set their own cites high: gender and self-citation across fields and over time. Socius 3:1–22
Knobloch-Westerwick S, Glynn CJ, Huge M (2013) The Matilda effect in science communication: an experiment on gender bias in publication quality perceptions and collaboration interest. Sci Commun 35(5):603–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012472684
Koffi M (2021) Innovative ideas and gender inequality. Working paper series, No. 35
Krawczyk M, Smyk M (2016) Author’s gender affects rating of academic articles: evidence from an incentivized, deception-free laboratory experiment. Eur Econ Rev 90:326–335
Lamb V (2018) Who knows the river? Gender, expertise, and the politics of local ecological knowledge production of the Salween River, Thai-Myanmar border. Gend Place Cult 25(12):1703–1718
Larivière V, Ni C, Gingras Y, Cronin B, Sugimoto CR (2013) Bibliometrics: global gender disparities in science. Nature 504:211–213. https://doi.org/10.1038/504211a
Leighton M (2020) Myths of meritocracy, friendship, and fun work: class and gender in North American academic communities. Am Anthropol 122(3):444–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13455
Lundberg S (2020) Women in economics. CEPR Press, London
Lundberg S, Stearns J (2019) Women in economics: stalled progress. J Econ Perspect 33(1):3–22
Maliniak D, Powers R, Walter BF (2013) The gender citation gap in international relations. Int Organ 67(4):889–922. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818313000209
McElhinny B, Hols M, Holtzkener J, Unger S, Hicks C (2003) Gender, publication and citation in sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology: the construction of a scholarly canon. Lang Soc 32(3):299–328. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404503323012
Merton RK (1968) The Matthew Effect in Science. Science (american Association for the Advancement of Science) 159(3810):56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56
Merton, R. K. (1957) Social theory and social structure (Rev. ed.). Free Press
Mirnezami SR, Beaudry C, Larivière V (2015) What determines researchers’ scientific impact? A case study of Quebec researchers. Sci Public Policy 43(2):262–274. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scv038
Nettasinghe B, Alipourfard N, Krishnamurthy V, Lerman K (2021) Emergence of structural inequalities in scientific citation networks. ar**v preprint ar**v :2103.10944
Piwowar ,H, Priem J, Larivière V, Alperin JP, Matthias L, Norlander B, Farley A, West J, Haustein S, The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ 6 e4375 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375
Rossiter MW (1993) The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Soc Stud Sci 23(2):325–341
Rubin H (2022) Structural causes of citation gaps. Philos Stud 179(7):2323–2345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-021-01765-3
Salmi P, Sonck-Rautio K (2018) Invisible work, ignored knowledge? Changing gender roles, division of labor, and household strategies in Finnish small-scale fisheries. Marit Stud 17(2):213–221
Smith CA, Williams EL, Wadud IA, Pirtle WNL, Collective CBW (2021) Cite Black Women: a critical praxis (a statement). Feminist Anthropology 2(1):10–17
Sotudeh H, Dehdarirad T, Freer J (2018) Gender differences in scientific productivity and visibility in core neurosurgery journals: citations and social media metrics. Res Eval 27(3):262. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvy003
Spangler K, Christie ME (2020) Renegotiating gender roles and cultivation practices in the Nepali mid-hills: unpacking the feminization of agriculture. Agric Hum Values 37:415–432
Squazzoni F, Bravo G, Farjam M, Marusic A, Mehmani B, Willis M, Birukou A, Dondio P, Grimaldo F (2021) Peer review and gender bias: a study on 145 scholarly journals. Sci Adv 7(2):eabd0299. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd0299
Su R, Rounds J (2015) All STEM fields are not created equal: people and things interests explain gender disparities across STEM Fields. Front Psychol 6:125967. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00189
Teich EG et al (2022) Citation inequity and gendered citation practices in contemporary physics. Nat Phys 18(10):1161–1170
Thelwall M (2018) Do gendered citation advantages influence field participation? Four unusual fields in the USA 1996–2017. Scientometrics 117(3):2133–2144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2926-0
Thelwall M (2019) Author gender differences in psychology citation impact 1996–2018. Int J Psychol 55(4):684–694. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12633
Thelwall M, Nevill T (2019) No evidence of citation bias as a determinant of stem gender disparities in US biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology research. Scientometrics 121(3):1793–1801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03271-0
Van Arensbergen P, Van der Weijden I, Van den Besselaar P (2012) Gender differences in scientific productivity: a persisting phenomenon? Scientometrics 93(3):857–868
Viiu GA (2016) A theoretical evaluation of Hirsch-type bibliometric indicators confronted with extreme self-citation. J Informet 10(2):552–566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.010
Weisshaar K (2017) Publish and perish? An assessment of gender gaps in promotion to tenure in academia. Soc Forces 96(2):529–560
Funding
We acknowledge partial funding for this project from The University of South Florida Women and Leadership Initiative Research Award—Muma College of Business.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors made substantial contributions to this article. H. O’Leary led the team in the conception and design of the work; the data acquisition, dataset creation and cleaning, analysis, and interpretation of data; and the write-up and critical revision of important intellectual content. E. Mann contributed to the conception and design of the work and the write-up and critical revision of important intellectual content. T. Gantzert was involved in the data acquisition, dataset creation and cleaning, analysis, interpretation of data, and drafting and critical revision labor. M. Nelson and N. Bollineni were involved in the dataset analysis, interpretation of data, and drafting and critical revision of figures. A. Mann was involved in the interpretation of data and the write-up and critical revision of important intellectual content.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
The data for this article was sourced from the works cited sections of published articles in the Journal of Environmental Studies (JESS) and Environment and Society (E&S).
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
O.’Leary, H., Gantzert, T., Mann, A. et al. Citation as representation: gendered academic citation politics persist in environmental studies publications. J Environ Stud Sci (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-024-00928-y
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-024-00928-y