IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aib/ibtjbs/v12y2016i1p21-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating The Gender Diversity In The Field Of Research: A Study Based On Editorial Boards Of Journals Falling In Isi Thomson Reuters

Author

Listed:
  • Ambreen Noman

    (Institute of Business and Technology)

  • Irfan Haider Shakri

    (Institute of Business and Technology)

  • Muhammad Tariq

    (Institute of Business and Technology)

Abstract

Purpose This paper reviews the gender composition in the editorial boards of the journals falling in the ISI Thomson Reuters.The purpose of this research paper is to watch the gender diversity in the editorial boards and to explore the perception of gender biasness if any in the field of research Methodology/Sample The study design is mix of quantitative and qualitative methods.The performance of either Gender has been measured via quantitative technique such as Independent sample T Test, whereas, the probable presence of Gender biasness has been investigated via comparative study of qualitative methods.This study takes a sample of 200 journals falling in ISI Thomson Reuters.Findings It has been concluded that there is Gender inequality in Editorial Journals despite of the fact that gender does not have significant impact on the performance of the journals in terms of the total citations.The mean total citation of the male dominated editorial boards has been observed as equal to that of mean total citation of the female dominated editorial boards.Practical Implications Any perception of gender inequality may create deplorable image in research field.Therefore, it is essential to encourage the gender equality as well as gender equity in the field of Research

Suggested Citation

  • Ambreen Noman & Irfan Haider Shakri & Muhammad Tariq, 2016. "Investigating The Gender Diversity In The Field Of Research: A Study Based On Editorial Boards Of Journals Falling In Isi Thomson Reuters," IBT Journal of Business Studies (JBS), Ilma University, Faculty of Management Science, vol. 12(1), pages 21-28.
    • Handle: RePEc:aib:ibtjbs:v:12:y:2016:i:1:p:21-28
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.46745/ilma.ibtjbs.2016.121.2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ibtjbs.ilmauniversity.edu.pk/journal/jbs/12.1/2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.46745/ilma.ibtjbs.2016.121.2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lokman Tutuncu, 2023. "All-pervading insider bias alters review time in Turkish university journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3743-3791, June.
    2. M. Fourcade & E. Ollion & Y. Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 7.
    3. Richard S. J. Tol, 2022. "Rise of the Kniesians: the professor-student network of Nobel laureates in economics," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 680-703, July.
    4. Heintzelman Martin & Nocetti Diego, 2009. "Where Should we Submit our Manuscript? An Analysis of Journal Submission Strategies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Cloos, Janis & Greiff, Matthias & Rusch, Hannes, 2020. "Geographical Concentration and Editorial Favoritism within the Field of Laboratory Experimental Economics (RM/19/029-revised-)," Research Memorandum 014, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    6. João Faria & Rajeev Goel, 2010. "Returns to networking in academia," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 103-117, July.
    7. Sascha Baghestanian & Sergey V. Popov, 2018. "On publication, refereeing and working hard," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1419-1459, November.
    8. Jinyoung Kim & Kanghyock Koh, 2014. "Incentives for Journal Editors," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 348-371, February.
    9. Michael J Hilmer & Christiana E Hilmer, 2011. "Do editors favor their students' work? A test of undue favoritism in top economics journals," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(1), pages 53-65.
    10. Radek Zdeněk & Jana Lososová, 2018. "An analysis of editorial board members’ publication output in agricultural economics and policy journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 563-578, October.
    11. Petersen, Alexander M., 2019. "Megajournal mismanagement: Manuscript decision bias and anomalous editor activity at PLOS ONE," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    12. Carmela Lutmar & Yaniv Reingewertz, 2021. "Academic in-group bias in the top five economics journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9543-9556, December.
    13. Lawson, Nicholas, 2023. "What citation tests really tell us about bias in academic publishing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. Lutmar, Carmela & Reingewertz, Yaniv, 2020. "Academic in-group bias in economics," MPRA Paper 104730, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Raffaele Miniaci & Michele Pezzoni, 2015. "Is Publication in the Hands of Outstanding Scientists? A Study on the Determinants of Editorial Boards Membership in Economics," GREDEG Working Papers 2015-17, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    16. Glötzl, Florentin & Aigner, Ernest, 2017. "Six Dimensions of Concentration in Economics: Scientometric Evidence from a Large-Scale Data Set," Ecological Economic Papers 15, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    17. Everett, Jeff, 2008. "Editorial proximity equals publication success: A function of rational self-interest or good-faith economy?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 19(8), pages 1149-1176.
    18. Raffaele Miniaci & Michele Pezzoni, 2020. "Social connections and editorship in economics," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 1292-1317, August.
    19. Simon Ek & Magnus Henrekson, 2019. "The Geography and Concentration of Authorship in the Top Five: Implications For European Economics," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 66(2), pages 215-245, May.
    20. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna, 2017. "What do Editors Maximize? Evidence from Four Leading Economics Journals," NBER Working Papers 23282, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Quality Journal; Gender inequality;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aib:ibtjbs:v:12:y:2016:i:1:p:21-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Syed Kashif Rafi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmilmpk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.