This research-based essay examines the national diversity of editorial boards from a selection of journals in communication sciences. Specifically, it reviews the board composition of 39 Journal Citation Report journals indexed in quartile one (Q1) and quartile two (Q2) in the category of ‘communication’, proposing a typology of dominant nationalities. The most distinguished countries are the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and Germany, monopolizing 79.4% of total members. The exaggerated domination of certain geographies is surprising given the increasing acknowledgement of plurality as a constitutive value of scientific progress. The article then problematizes why plurality is limited and, therefore, identifies a body of social and cultural bonds that underpin the domination of certain epistemic cultures. The study finally proposes an agenda that moves beyond the current status quo, and considers how these actions are likely to promote a more pluralistic and diverse intellectual terrain.

This article tests whether the geographic diversity of editorial boards affects the diversity of research papers. Based on a content analysis of 84 journals listed in the Journal Citation Report, we show that diverse editorial boards are more likely to publish more diverse research articles, based on the country of origin of the first author and on where the data were collected. Our findings also indicate a negative association between (a) the impact factor and diversity of the research approach, (b) the journal’s affiliation to an academic association and diversity in the first author’s country of origin and the country of data collection, and (c) the founding year of the publication and the country of data collection. Finally, the founding year of the publication is explored as a moderator.

No abstract

No abstract