Guest Editorial Introduction: Gender, Equity, and the Peer Review Process at the <i>Journal of Field Archaeology</i>

Heath-Stout, Laura E.

doi:10.1080/00934690.2020.1719295

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More recent studies in the United States have confirmed that these problems continue, despite increased awareness and in the face of a growing (albeit minority) sentiment that men in STEM fields now suffer from “reverse discrimination” (Funk and Parker 2018). In the United States, gender disparities remain in tenure-track archaeology hiring (Goldstein et al 2018; Speakman, Hadden, Colvin, Cramb, Jones, Jones, et al 2018; Speakman, Hadden, Colvin, Cramb, Jones, Kling, et al 2018), senior research grant submissions (Goldstein et al 2018), and participation in conferences and publishing in peer-reviewed journals, especially those with high impact factors (Bardolph 2014; Bardolph and VanDerwarker 2016; Fulkerson and Tushingham 2019; Gamble 2020; Heath-Stout 2019, 2020a, 2020b; Rautman 2012; Tushingham et al 2017).…”

Section: Academic Archaeology Turns a Gendered Lens In On Itselfmentioning

confidence: 99%

A “Leaky” Pipeline and Chilly Climate in Archaeology in Canada

Overholtzer

Jalbert²

2021

Am. Antiq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article quantifies the rate at which women archaeologists are present and retained in university departments. Drawing on publicly available data, we examine gender representation in (1) doctorates earned between 2002–2003 and 2016–2017; (2) Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) grant applications and awards at the doctoral to senior levels between 2003 and 2017; (3) tenure-stream faculty at Canadian universities in 2019; and (4) placement of Canadian PhDs in the United States. These data demonstrate that women today represent two-thirds of all Canadian doctorates in archaeology, but only one-third of Canadian tenure-stream faculty, although not all archaeologists choose an academic career. In the last 15 years, women with Canadian PhDs have been hired into tenure-track positions in Canada at rates statistically lower than men, but at higher rates in the United States. Women apply for SSHRC archaeology grants in equal proportion to their presence, but men are awarded at a slightly higher rate. We end by discussing the possible reasons for this gendered attrition, including a “chilly climate”—that is, subtle practices that stereotype, exclude, and devalue women, as well as inhospitable working environments, particularly for primary caregivers. We warn that the current COVID-19 pandemic is likely to exacerbate these existing inequalities.

show abstract

Section: Academic Archaeology Turns a Gendered Lens In On Itselfmentioning

confidence: 99%

A “Leaky” Pipeline and Chilly Climate in Archaeology in Canada

Overholtzer

Jalbert²

2021

Am. Antiq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are various ways that concerned scholars can contribute to diversifying knowledge production practices. Marginalized archaeologists can submit their work to more prestigious journals, since discrepancies in publication rates seem to relate more to differential submission rates than to inequitable acceptance rates (Heath-Stout 2020; Rautman 2012). Their privileged colleagues and mentors can support them in these attempts by encouraging them to submit to prestigious venues and by offering help in editing and polishing manuscripts.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…She could find no evidence of sexism in the peer review and editorial processes, and Gamble (2020) found that the same was true for the calendar years of 2018 and 2019. My study of submissions and peer review outcomes at the Journal of Field Archaeology (Heath-Stout 2020) showed that, in recent years, although women have had slightly higher acceptance rates than men, the journal continues to publish more articles by men than by women because men submit so many more manuscripts. Similarly, Bardolph and Vanderwarker's (2016) survey of members of the Southeastern Archaeology Conference found that men submitted more manuscripts to journals than women did.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Usually, this work has focused on quantifying the publications by men and by women in a variety of journals and over a variety of periods (e.g., Bardolph 2014, 2018; Bardolph and Vanderwarker 2016; Beaudry and White 1994; Ford 1994; Ford and Hundt 1994; Fulkerson and Tushingham 2019; Handly 1995; Tushingham et al 2017; Victor and Beaudry 1992). In some cases, archaeologists have also examined the gendered politics of citation practices (e.g., Beaudry and White 1994; Hutson 2002), and some journals have conducted self-studies to examine acceptances and rejections with reference to author gender (Heath-Stout 2020; Rautman 2012). The most recent research has shown that domination by men is pervasive in both national and regional American archaeology journals (Bardolph 2014), although increasing numbers of women present at regional conferences (Bardolph 2018; Bardolph and Vanderwarker 2016).…”

Section: Gender Equity Studies In Archaeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who Writes about Archaeology? An Intersectional Study of Authorship in Archaeological Journals

Heath-Stout

2020

Am. Antiq.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1980s, activist archaeologists have used quantitative studies of journal authorship to show that the demographics of archaeological knowledge production are homogeneous. This literature, however, focuses almost exclusively on the gender of archaeologists, without deeply engaging with other forms of identity or adequately addressing the methodological limitations of assigning binary gender identifications based on first names. This paper rectifies these limitations through an intersectional study of inequities in academic archaeological publications by presenting the results of a survey of authors who published in 21 archaeology journals over a 10-year period (2007–2016). This survey asked them to provide their self-identifications in terms of gender, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. The results demonstrate that although there has been an influx of women archaeologists in recent decades, we have not yet reached gender parity. They also show that because many women archaeologists are cisgender, white, and heterosexual, the discipline's knowledge producers remain relatively homogeneous. Furthermore, although there is demographic variation between journals, there is a strong correlation between journal prestige and the percentage of authors who are straight, white, cisgender men. This intersectional study of journal authorship demographics provides a comprehensive perspective on issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the discipline of archaeology.

show abstract

“…The authors also note that the rate of authorship changed very little over 74 years. Similarly, Heath‐Stout (2020) reports gender disparity in authors published in the Journal of Field Archaeology (JFA) . Upon examining article submissions, peer review and publication patterns at JFA over the 3‐year period from 2016 to 2019, Heath‐Stout concluded that the gender imbalance present in publication patterns was due to a lower submission rate rather than bias in the review process.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring racial equity in the science education journal review process

Nkrumah

Mutegi

2022

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across a broad range of disciplines, research has found that inequity is systemic in the journal review process. Collectively, however, this study does not specifically examine racial inequity. Moreover, literature on the peer review process in science education, in particular, does not foreground equity as a subject of study. The present study aims to address this void by examining racial equity in the peer review process with a specific focus on journals in science education. Data are collected from lead editors of major science education journals through the form of interviews, focus groups, and critical arts‐based methods. The two research questions driving data collection are (a) In what ways does the science education journal peer review process promote racial equity? and (b) How are science education journal editors’ perceptions of racial inequity reflected in the peer review process? McNair and colleagues’ racial equity framework informs the explorations of journal review in science education from the lead editors’ perspectives. From our findings, we offer four suggestions for moving toward greater racial equity in the science education peer review process.

show abstract

Guest Editorial Introduction: Gender, Equity, and the Peer Review Process at the Journal of Field Archaeology

Cited by 15 publications

References 14 publications

A “Leaky” Pipeline and Chilly Climate in Archaeology in Canada

A “Leaky” Pipeline and Chilly Climate in Archaeology in Canada

Who Writes about Archaeology? An Intersectional Study of Authorship in Archaeological Journals

Exploring racial equity in the science education journal review process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About