Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:40:02.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Was the COVID-19 Pandemic Associated with Gender Disparities in Authorship of Manuscripts Submitted to Clinical Neuropsychology Journals?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 December 2021

Michelle A. Babicz Open the ORCID record for Michelle A. Babicz [Opens in a new window] ,
Anastasia Matchanova ,
Robiann Broomfield ,
Libby A. DesRuisseaux ,
Michelle M. Gereau ,
Stacey L. Brothers ,
Lauren Radigan ,
Erik Porter ,
Gregory P. Lee  and
Lisa J. Rapport
...Show all authors
Michelle A. Babicz*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
Anastasia Matchanova
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
Robiann Broomfield
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA
Libby A. DesRuisseaux
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Michelle M. Gereau
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Stacey L. Brothers
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Lauren Radigan
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA
Erik Porter
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neuropsychology, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ, USA
Gregory P. Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neuropsychology, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ, USA
Lisa J. Rapport
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA
Yana Suchy
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Keith Owen Yeates
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, AB, Canada Alberta Children’s Hospital Research Institute, University of Calgary, AB, Canada Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, AB, Canada
Steven Paul Woods
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: Michelle A. Babicz, Department of Psychology, University of Houston, 126 Heyne Building (Ste. 239d), Houston, TX 77004-5022, USA. E-mail: mababicz@uh.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated gender disparities in some academic disciplines. This study examined the association of the pandemic with gender authorship disparities in clinical neuropsychology (CN) journals.

Method:

Author bylines of 1,018 initial manuscript submissions to four major CN journals from March 15 through September 15 of both 2019 and 2020 were coded for binary gender. Additionally, authorship of 40 articles published on pandemic-related topics (COVID-19, teleneuropsychology) across nine CN journals were coded for binary gender.

Results:

Initial submissions to these four CN journals increased during the pandemic (+27.2%), with comparable increases in total number of authors coded as either women (+23.0%) or men (+25.4%). Neither the average percentage of women on manuscript bylines nor the proportion of women who were lead and/or corresponding authors differed significantly across time. Moreover, the representation of women as authors of pandemic-related articles did not differ from expected frequencies in the field.

Conclusions:

Findings suggest that representation of women as authors of peer-reviewed manuscript submissions to some CN journals did not change during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies might examine how risk and protective factors may have influenced individual differences in scientific productivity during the pandemic.

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2BibliometricsFemaleMalePublicationsPeer review
Type
Brief Communication
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 105 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic may have exacerbated gender gaps in academia. Emerging data suggest that womenFootnote 1 have had disproportionate reductions in research time and productivity coupled with increased time spent on childcare and housework (Deryugina, Shurchkov, & Stearns, Reference Deryugina, Shurchkov and Stearns2021). Studies of scientific authorship during COVID-19 show that – despite higher overall rates of production during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (Cui, Ding, & Zhu, Reference Cui, Ding and Zhuin press) – the relative proportion of manuscript submissions (Cui et al., Reference Cui, Ding and Zhuin press) and publications (Muric, Lerman, & Ferrara, Reference Muric, Lerman and Ferrara2021) was lower for women than for men. These gender disparities are also evident in articles about COVID-19, on which women represent only one-third of authors (Lerchenmüller, et al., Reference Lerchenmüller, Schmallenbach, Jena and Lerchenmueller2021). The underrepresentation of women during this critical period could have longstanding negative effects on academic advancement in promotion systems based heavily on publications (Wren, et al., Reference Wren, Kozak, Johnson, Deakyne, Schilling and Dellavalle2007).

We do not know the extent to which the pandemic has affected the research productivity of women in clinical neuropsychology (CN), who represent 60% of the field (Sweet, Klipfel, Nelson, & Moberg, Reference Sweet, Klipfel, Nelson and Moberg2021). CN has a history of gender disparities in multiple domains, including scientific publishing (Rohling et al., Reference Rohling, Ready, Dhanani and Suhrin press). A recent study of 10,531 articles published between 1985 and 2019 in six CN journals revealed that women were underrepresented as authors in the 2000s, despite their growing prevalence in the field; for example, 43.3% of the authors listed in CN article bylines were women (Matchanova et al., Reference Matchanova, Avci, Babicz, Thompson, Johnson, Ke and Woodsin press), yet women comprised approximately 52% of clinical neuropsychologists during this period (Sweet, Lee, Guidotti Breting, & Benson, Reference Sweet, Lee, Guidotti Breting and Benson2018). The present study extends this work by examining whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected the representation of women as authors on initial submissions to four representative CN journals. In addition, we report the representation of women on articles about the pandemic (e.g., COVID-19, teleneuropsychology) published in all major CN journals. The latter analysis provides insights on the extent to which women were productive in novel, emergent research projects during the pandemic and expands upon the limited representation of journals in the primary study by including all major journals in the field.

METHOD

Study 1: Initial Submissions to CN Journals

Invitations to participate in this study were sent by SPW and KOY to the editors of nine major journals in CN (Sweet, Meyer, Nelson, & Moberg, Reference Sweet, Meyer, Nelson and Moberg2011) via electronic mail in April 2020. The editors of Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology (ACN), Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology (JCEN), Neuropsychology (NP), and The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) all agreed to participate by confirming their ability to secure the relevant permissions and data from their respective journal publishers. The remaining editors declined to participate, primarily due to limited resources or difficulties securing the relevant data and/or permissions. The institutional review board (IRB) at Wayne State University approved the coding and analysis of the data from JCEN, whereas IRBs at the University of Houston and University of Utah both independently determined that this retrospective, de-identified study was exempt. All aspects of the study were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Representatives from the four journals coded the probable genderFootnote 2 of each author on every consecutive initial submission received from March 15 through September 15 in the years 2019 and 2020. Each author was coded as either a man or woman for submissions to ACN, JCEN, and TCN based on the OpenGenderTracking Project database (Ros, Matias, & Hyland, Reference Ros, Matias and Hyland2013), which contains binary gender probabilities for over 90,000 first names that are derived from census data in the USA and UK. Where possible, authors whose names were not listed in the database or who were gender atypical were coded by verifying their gender on an institutional or personal website. This method has excellent interrater reliability (Matchanova et al., Reference Matchanova, Avci, Babicz, Thompson, Johnson, Ke and Woodsin press; Odic & Wojcik, Reference Odic and Wojcik2020). The gender coding for Neuropsychology was conducted by the publisher as part of a broader project that used https://genderize.io/, which provides reliable estimates of authors’ binary gender from their first name based on over 100 million data points collected from social media across over 200 countries.

The author byline coding from 1,070 records were sent in a deidentified file to the corresponding author (SPW). Fifty-two records were excluded because the lead or corresponding author names were not codable, which included submissions from Asia (65.4%), Europe/UK (17.4%), USA (7.7%), Central/South America (5.7%), Middle East (1.9%), and Canada (1.9%). The remaining 1,018 records were from primarily from author groups in the Europe/UK (31%) and U.S. (39%). The following variables were generated from the eligible records: (1) a continuous variable representing the number of women on the author byline (range = 0–27); (2) a continuous variable representing the percentage of women on the author byline (adjusted for any un-codable authors; range = 0–100%); (3) a binary variable indicating whether the lead author was a woman or a man; and (4) a binary variable indicating whether the corresponding author was a woman or a man.

Study 2: Pandemic-Related Articles Published in CN Journals

We identified all articles that were published in nine major neuropsychology journals between March 2020 and March 2021. Specifically, two authors reviewed the table of contents and advanced access sections of the four journals from Study 1, plus Applied Neuropsychology-Adult, Child Neuropsychology, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, Journal of Neuropsychology, and Neuropsychology Review. We selected papers that were related to the pandemic (e.g., COVID-19, teleneuropsychology) based on the contents in the title and abstract. We then used the methods described above for the OpenGenderTracking Project database to code the gender of all authors of every study in this sample. There were zero uncodable authors.

RESULTS

Study 1: Initial Submissions to CN Journals

Initial manuscript submissions to CN journals rose by 27%, from 448 submissions in 2019 to 570 submissions in 2020, (Pocock’s z = 3.9, p < .001; Pocock, Reference Pocock2006). The total submissions in 2019 and 2020 did not vary significantly by journal (X 2 (3, n = 1018) = 1.90, p = .595].

Results showed that 2,912 of the 5,304 authors across all articles (n = 1,018) were women (54.9%). The total number of authors who were women rose from 1,306 in 2019 to 1,606 in 2020, which is a significant increase of 23.0% (Pocock’s z = 5.6, p < .001). The total number of authors who were men rose from 1,061 in 2019 to 1,331 in 2020, which is also a significant increase of 25.4% (Pocock’s z = 5.5, p < .001). The increase in women authors from 2019 to 2020 did not differ from the increase in men authors during this timeframe (Pocock’s z = 0.34, p = .37).

Next, we conducted a multiple regression predicting the percentage of authors who were women on any given submission byline across all articles (n = 1,018). The dummy-coded categorical predictors were: (a) year (2019 or 2020); (b) journal; and (c) the interaction of year and journal (see Figure 1). The overall model was not significant [F (7, 1010) = 1.74, p = .095] and explained a very small amount of the variance (adjusted R 2 = .01). No main effects or interactions in this model were significant (all ps > .05).

Fig. 1. Percentage of woman as authors in the bylines of initial manuscript submissions to clinical neuropsychology journals during the period of March through September 2019 and 2020. ACN = Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology; JCEN = Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology; NP = Neuropsychology; and TCN = The Clinical Neuropsychologist. The double line symbol denotes a break in the Y-axis. Error bars reflect standard error. Note. Includes full sample (n = 1,018).

We then conducted a logistic regression predicting the likelihood of women as lead authors, again using year, journal, and their interaction as predictors (see Figure 2a). The overall model was not significant [X 2 (7, 1010) = 5.40, p = .617], nor were any of the individual predictors in the model significant (ps > .05, odds ratios < 1.3). Figure 2b shows similar null findings in a parallel logistic regression conducted with corresponding author as the criterion [X 2 (7, 236) = 12.00, p = .102]. Although this analysis was conducted conservatively on the 244 records for which a different person was lead and corresponding author, the overall model also was not significant when the analysis was conducted in the full sample [X 2 (7, 1010) = 8.3, p = .310].

Fig. 2. Stacked column chart showing the frequency of women as lead (a) and corresponding (b) authors in the bylines of initial manuscript submissions to clinical neuropsychology journals during the period of March through September 2019 and 2020. Note. Excludes cases in which the same individual was both lead and corresponding author (n = 244).

Study 1 post hoc analyses

Epochs. Given the evolving nature of COVID-19, we also conducted a post hoc analysis to check for differences between the early (March 15–June 15) versus later (June 16–September 15) part of 2020. We repeated the multiple and logistic regression analyses described above and added main effects and interaction terms for a binary epoch variable that was dummy coded for early (0) versus late (1). No main effects or interactions for epoch emerged as significant predictors of the percentage of women on the byline or the likelihood of submissions with women as first or corresponding authors (all ps > .05)

Sponsorship. We also conducted post hoc analyses to examine the role of sponsorship in manuscript submissions, given its importance for authorship among women in CN (Matchanova et al., Reference Matchanova, Avci, Babicz, Thompson, Johnson, Ke and Woodsin press). Specifically, we conducted a series of one-way ANOVAs on the 570 initial submissions from 2020, with the continuous percentage of women authors as the dependent variable and the presence of a woman as either lead or corresponding author (binary yes/no) as independent variables. Results showed a higher percentage of women on author bylines when women were lead [70.0% vs. 32.9%; F (1, 568) = 302.32, p < .001, d = 1.59] or corresponding authors [71.2% vs. 37.8%; F (1, 568) = 269.94, p < .001, d = 1.52]. Similarly, among the 136 manuscripts submitted in 2020 in which the first and corresponding author were not the same person, the first author was 2.3 times more likely to be a woman when the corresponding author was also a woman, X 2 (1, n = 136) = 4.55; CI 95% 1.05, 5.05).

Study 2: Pandemic-Related Articles Published in CN Journals

Forty papers were identified across five journals, with author groups primarily located in North America. In total, 161 of the 237 authors of pandemic-related articles published in CN journals were women (67.9%). The following series of one-sample tests was anchored by the estimated 60% prevalence of women in CN (Sweet et al., Reference Sweet, Klipfel, Nelson and Moberg2021). On average, 64.4% (SD = 29.90, range = 0.0–100) of the authors on the bylines of the 40 articles were women, which did not differ statistically from the estimated prevalence of women in the field (one-sample t = 0.93, df = 39, p = .357, Cohen’s d = 0.13). Likewise, 67.5% and 65.0% of the lead and corresponding authors were women, respectively, which did not differ significantly from the estimated prevalence of women in the field (one-sample X 2 s < 1.0, ps > .05).

DISCUSSION

Emerging research suggests that women in academia were disproportionately affected during the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic in both home and professional activities, including publishing (Deryugina et al., Reference Deryugina, Shurchkov and Stearns2021; Krukowski et al., Reference Krukowski, Jagsi and Cardel2021). Encouragingly, the present findings show no evidence of gender disparities in authorship or author byline position in manuscripts submitted to four major neuropsychology journals. In fact, submissions authored by men and women both increased during the pandemic. Similarly, women were well represented among 40 COVID-19 related publications in nine major CN journals. Thus, our findings suggest that women in CN were not underrepresented in research activity as indexed by journal submissions and publications, despite the notable stressors and challenges that accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic. Representation of women as authors in manuscript submissions during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic was largely comparable to that of women as authors in published manuscripts both within the larger field of psychology (see Odic & Wojcik, Reference Odic and Wojcik2020) and within the subspecialty of CN (Matchanova et al., Reference Matchanova, Avci, Babicz, Thompson, Johnson, Ke and Woodsin press) over the past few years.

We considered several possible explanations for these encouraging findings. First, the research productivity of women clinical neuropsychologists may have kept pace with pre-COVID-19 research productivity levels because of the surge of young women in the field over the past two decades (Hilsabeck & Martin, Reference Hilsabeck and Martin2010; Sweet et al., Reference Sweet, Lee, Guidotti Breting and Benson2018). Younger professionals might have experienced a reduction in clinical and teaching responsibilities due to halted in-person services and might also have been less affected by increased childcare and household responsibilities as compared to mid-career women. In fact, an exploratory search revealed that among the 40 articles related to COVID-19 in CN journals, 77.7% of women as first authors were trainees or early-career scientists, as determined by their institution or personal website. Second, the sponsorship and mentorship provided to these early-career women by mid- and late-career women clinical neuropsychologists may have been protective during this tumultuous period (de Vries et al., Reference de Vries, Webb and Eveline2006). Third, compared to other fields, psychologists may be better suited to acknowledge existing biases in the professional field and challenge them (APA, 2017). Relatedly, clinical neuropsychologists benefit from training in clinical psychology, including learning effective coping strategies, which in turn may have built added resilience to the stress of COVID-19. Interested readers are referred to a recent series of publications in The Clinical Neuropsychologist (Hilsabeck & Rivera Mindt, Reference Hilsabeck and Rivera Mindt2020) for recommendations on ways we can act as individuals and as a discipline to bolster women in the field of CN.

The current study is not without its limitations. Gender coding systems were binary and based on estimated probabilities from national databases that may have resulted in gender assigned to authors that does not match their identity. The lead or corresponding authors were uncodable for 4.5% of the articles, which were therefore excluded from analyses. This rate of exclusion is slightly lower than reported in prior studies using similar coding methods (Matchanova et al., Reference Matchanova, Avci, Babicz, Thompson, Johnson, Ke and Woodsin press; Odic & Wojcik, Reference Odic and Wojcik2020), with Asia being the geographic region of origin for most of these articles. A minority of authors were from regions other than Europe/UK and North America. Only four of nine CN journals participated in Study 1; however, all nine journals were included in Study 2 and its similar results help to bolster the representativeness and robustness of the findings. Lastly, information about the race and ethnicity of the authors was not available, and we therefore were unable to comment on the potential intersectional impact of gender and race/ethnicity on research productivity during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the underrepresentation of people who identify as Black and Latinx in CN (Sweet et al., Reference Sweet, Klipfel, Nelson and Moberg2021), prospective studies are needed to identify specific risk and resilience factors related to scientific productivity and academic advancement in individuals from these ethnoracial backgrounds.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank all of the women who have served as our mentors, sponsors, and collaborators over the years and in years to come. The authors also thank Steph Pollock and Lois Jones at the American Psychological Association for their efforts in securing and coding the data for Neuropsychology.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT

There were no funding sources for this project.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Several authors serve major editorial roles for the journals that were included in this study. Dr. Lee is the Editor-in-Chief of Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology and is on the editorial board of Neuropsychology Review. Dr. Rapport is the co-Editor-in-Chief for Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology and is on the editorial board of The Clinical Neuropsychologist. Dr. Suchy is the Editor-in-Chief for The Clinical Neuropsychologist and is on the editorial board of Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society and Neuropsychology Review. Dr. Yeates is Editor-in-Chief for Neuropsychology and is on the editorial board of Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Child Neuropsychology, and Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation. Dr. Woods is an Associate Editor for both The Clinical Neuropsychologist and Neuropsychology and is on the editorial boards of Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, and Neuropsychology Review. The other authors report no other conflicts of interest.

Footnotes

1 This paper uses a framework of “gender” (viz., men and women) rather than “sex” (i.e., male and female) because our aims are focused on the cultural aspects of research engagement and not on biological differences per se. In doing so, we acknowledge that gender is not a binary construct and that many of the foundational studies and methods in this area are limited by their binary approach to gender classification.

2 Note that individuals with a nonbinary gender identity are not represented in either database used in this study (for more information about nonbinary gender identities, please visit https://www.apadivisions.org/division-44/resources/advocacy/non-binary-facts.pdf), and it is possible that the binary gender coding used in this study may not align with the gender identities of some authors.

References

REFERENCES

American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/ Google Scholar
Cui, R., Ding, H., & Zhu, F. (in press). Gender inequality in research productivity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3623492 Google Scholar
de Vries, J.D., Webb, C., & Eveline, J. (2006). Mentoring for gender equality and organisational change. Employee Relations, 28(6), 573–587. doi: 10.1108/01425450610704506 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deryugina, T., Shurchkov, O., & Stearns, J. (2021). Covid-19 disruptions disproportionately affect female academics. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 111, 164–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilsabeck, R.C. (2018). Editorial: Raising awareness about gender bias and disparity in clinical neuropsychology and a call to action. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 32(2), 183–185. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2017.1418023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilsabeck, R.C. & Martin, E.M. (2010). Women and advancement in neuropsychology: Real-life lessons learned. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 24(3), 481–492. doi: 10.1080/13854040802360566 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hilsabeck, R.C. & Rivera Mindt, M. (2020). Editorial from the TCN department of culture and gender in neuropsychology: Updates, future directions, and next steps. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 34(5), 863–872. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2020.1772886 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krukowski, R. A., Jagsi, R., & Cardel, M. I. (2021). Academic productivity differences by gender and child age in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Women’s Health, 30(3), 341–347. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2020.8710 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lerchenmüller, C., Schmallenbach, L., Jena, A.B., & Lerchenmueller, M.J. (2021). Longitudinal analyses of gender differences in first authorship publications related to COVID-19. BMJ Open, 11(4), e045176. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045176 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matchanova, A., Avci, G., Babicz, M.A., Thompson, J.L., Johnson, B., Ke, I.J., … Woods, S.P. (in press). Gender disparities in the author bylines of articles published in clinical neuropsychology journals from 1985 to 2019. The Clinical Neuropsychologist. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2020.1843713 Google Scholar
Muric, G., Lerman, K., & Ferrara, E. (2021). Gender disparity in the authorship of biomedical research publications during the COVID-19 pandemic: Retrospective observational study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(4), e25379. doi: 10.2196/25379 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odic, D. & Wojcik, E.H. (2020). The publication gender gap in psychology. American Psychologist, 75(1), 92–103. doi: 10.1037/amp0000480 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pocock, S.J. (2006). The simplest statistical test: How to check for a difference between treatments. BMJ, 332(7552), 1256–1268. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7552.1256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rohling, M.L., Ready, R.E., Dhanani, L.Y., & Suhr, J.A. (in press). Shift happens: The gender composition in clinical neuropsychology over five decades. The Clinical Neuropsychologist. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2020.1778791 Google Scholar
Ros, I., Matias, J.N., & Hyland, A. (2013). Open gender tracker. Retrived from https://opengendertracking.github.io/ Google Scholar
Sweet, J.J., Klipfel, K.M., Nelson, N.W., & Moberg, P.J. (2021). Professional practices, beliefs, and incomes of US neuropsychologists: The AACN, NAN, SCN 2020 practice and “salary survey”. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 35(1), 7–80. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2020.1849803 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sweet, J.J., Lee, C., Guidotti Breting, L.M., & Benson, L.M. (2018). Gender in clinical neuropsychology: Practice survey trends and comparisons outside the specialty. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 32(2), 186–216. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2017.1365932 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sweet, J.J., Meyer, D.G., Nelson, N.W., & Moberg, P.J. (2011). The TCN/AACN 2010 “salary survey”: Professional practices, beliefs, and incomes of U.S. neuropsychologists. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 25(1), 12–61. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2010.544165 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wren, J.D., Kozak, K.Z., Johnson, K.R., Deakyne, S.J., Schilling, L.M., & Dellavalle, R.P. (2007). The write position: A survey of perceived contributions to papers based on byline position and number of authors. EMBO Reports, 8(11), 988–991. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7401095 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Percentage of woman as authors in the bylines of initial manuscript submissions to clinical neuropsychology journals during the period of March through September 2019 and 2020. ACN = Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology; JCEN = Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology; NP = Neuropsychology; and TCN = The Clinical Neuropsychologist. The double line symbol denotes a break in the Y-axis. Error bars reflect standard error. Note. Includes full sample (n = 1,018).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Stacked column chart showing the frequency of women as lead (a) and corresponding (b) authors in the bylines of initial manuscript submissions to clinical neuropsychology journals during the period of March through September 2019 and 2020. Note. Excludes cases in which the same individual was both lead and corresponding author (n = 244).