The gender publication gap puts women at a disadvantage for tenure and promotion, which contributes to the discipline’s leaky pipeline. Several studies published in PS find no evidence of gender bias in the review process and instead suggest that submission pools are distorted by gender. To make a contribution to this important debate, we fielded an original survey to a sample of American Political Science Association members to measure participants’ perceptions of political science journals. Results reveal that the gender submission gap is accompanied by a gender perception gap at some but not all political science journals we study. Women report that they are more likely to submit to and get published in some journals, whereas men report as such with regard to other journals. Importantly, these gaps are observed even among scholars with the same methodological (i.e., quantitative or qualitative) approach.

In face of the ongoing discrepancy between the number of political science PhD graduates and the availability of permanent academic positions, in this article we consider attitudes of faculty members towards options to address this issue. Based on a survey of faculty members in PhD-granting political science programs at English-speaking Canadian universities, we find considerable support for both reducing the number of PhD students admitted and reforming curriculum to ensure graduates cultivate skills transferable to non-academic environments. At the same time, faculty members are inclined to believe that PhD students themselves should shoulder the greatest responsibility for career preparation.

This article uses data collected from Google Scholar to identify characteristics of scholars who have chosen to create a Google Scholar profile. Among tenured and tenure-track faculty with full-time appointments in PhD-granting political science departments, we find that only 43.7% have created a profile. However, among R1 faculty, young and early-career faculty are more likely to have Google Scholar profiles than those in older cohorts. Although subfield differences are largely nonexistent, there is a notably low proportion of theory faculty with profiles and a slightly higher proportion with profiles among methodologists. Moreover, within cohorts, those who are highly cited are more likely to have profiles than those who have low citation counts. We conclude by discussing implications of our findings, the increasing usage of Google Scholar and profiles, and the increasing importance of an online presence in the academy.

The importance of slideware presentations at conferences remains underestimated. Although several articles in the profession focus on this topic, emphasis on aspects of design and aesthetics appears scant. Changing trends and advances in software, instructional design, and human–computer interactions demand political scientists adapt and pay greater attention to balance and harmony, learning to distinguish between design and decoration. Building on Salmond and Smith’s (2011) work, this article offers 10 tips for creating cleaner, more visually appealing, minimalist slideware presentations. In a world of smartphones and social media, audiences are accustomed to visual aids; therefore, clearly and succinctly conveying a presenter’s core argument and/or results is not only crucial but also paramount.

As faculty members, we rely on academic freedom to protect us as we teach, engage in scholarly research, and live as citizens of a community. The American Association of University Professors is the accepted authority in matters of academic freedom, and its guidelines explain protections in teaching, research, and extramural utterances. This article argues that the characteristics of social media and the concerns of academic institutions about their reputation have created an atmosphere that make extramural utterances more vulnerable and riskier than in the past. Some institutions even monitor the social media postings of faculty members and act on such postings, openly criticizing and even disavowing or punishing them for their utterances. I consider these issues and make a modest proposal that may improve the environment for extramural utterances by faculty members.

Studies investigating gender gaps in the doctoral training of political science students have focused so far overwhelmingly on the US context. Although important research within this context has made strides in identifying the persistent challenges to women’s incorporation in political methodology, much remains unknown about whether women and men have different experiences in methods training during their PhD programs. We contribute to this debate by analyzing data from an original survey on the methods-training experiences of political science PhD students at different European universities. We assess whether gender gaps exist with respect to PhD students’ methods training and confidence in employing methods skills. Our findings show that women cover significantly fewer methods courses in their doctoral training. When women do participate in methods training, they show levels of method employment similar to their male colleagues. We discuss the implications of these findings in the context of European doctoral training.

LGBTQ activists and academics advocate the use of non-binary gender categories to include individuals who identify as neither rigidly male nor rigidly female to reflect the increasing number of people who do not place themselves in these two conventional classes. Although some general-population surveys have begun using non-binary gender questions, research has not examined the consequences of using (or not) a question with non-binary gender categories in surveys and censuses. Our study addresses this gap using a survey experiment in which respondents in the United States, Canada, and Sweden randomly received a binary or a non-binary gender question. We find no evidence of negative reactions to the non-binary question. Moreover, when there is a statistical difference, the reactions are positive. We thus conclude that general-population surveys could use a non-binary question without facing significant adverse reactions from respondents.

How should scholars recognize and respond to the complexities of positionality during the research process? Although there has been much theorizing on the intersectional and context-dependent nature of positionality, there remains a disjuncture between how positionality is understood theoretically and how it is applied. Ignoring the dynamism of positionality in practice has implications for the research process. This article theorizes one means of recognizing and responding to positionality in practice: a posture of “active reflexivity.” It outlines how we can become actively reflexive by adopting a disposition toward both ongoing reflection about our own social location and ongoing reflection on our assumptions regarding others’ perceptions. We then articulate four strategies for doing active reflexivity: recording assumptions around positionality; routinizing and systemizing reflexivity; bringing other actors into the process; and “showing our work” in the publication process.

This article discusses the two most important things that I have learned since taking a full-time position in 2014 at a newer private university in the Balkans: (1) the unique challenges you face when doing research in such a setting; and (2) how to handle the significant cultural differences that you will face in the classroom. This article also offers recommendations for earning the trust of students who will be suspicious of your motivation for teaching in their country. If you can manage these two realities, you will have a much easier time finding personal fulfillment and, ultimately, professional success in your new endeavor. This article focuses primarily on teaching in newer, private institutions known as Foundation Universities in developing countries more than long-established public institutions. However, you most certainly will face issues in these public institutions similar to those at smaller private ones.

The political science math prefresher arose a quarter-century ago and has now spread to many of our discipline’s PhD programs. Incoming students arrive for graduate school a few weeks early for ungraded instruction in math, statistics, and computer science as they relate to political science. The prefresher’s benefits, however, go beyond its technical content: it opens pathways to mastering methods necessary for political science research, facilitates connections among peers, and—perhaps most important—eases the transition to the increasingly collaborative nature of graduate work. The prefresher also shows how faculty across a highly diverse discipline have worked together to train the next generation. We review this program and advance its collaborative aspects by building infrastructure to share teaching content across universities so that separate programs can build on one another’s work and improve all of our programs.