WEIRD psychological science - geographical patterns of knowledge production

StatusVoR
Simple item page
dc.abstract.enWe examined gender and geographical patterns of authorship (N = 1,273,571) across psychology journals listed in Scopus (N = 1,398) depending on their citation impact for 4 consecutive years (from 2020 to 2023). We observed gender balance and a dominance of authors from WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) countries in the authors sample (N = 921,411). The percentage of WEIRD authors varied as a function of journals’ impact, so that more WEIRD authors published in higher impact journals, and were more probable to be in a first and last authors position. Our findings show that while more authors from underrepresented regions are contributing to psychological journals, journals with higher prestige tend to have fewer of these authors. We also argue that the apparent 50/50 gender balance observed may still reflect representation bias, that is, an inadequate number of women as authors given base rates of their professional participation in psychology. These insights are crucial for fostering a more inclusive and representative field of psychology, which can lead to more equitable research practices and better outcomes for diverse populations.
dc.affiliationWarsaw
dc.affiliationCentrum Badań nad Relacjami Społecznymi
dc.affiliationInstytut Psychologii
dc.contributor.authorDzanko, Lejla
dc.contributor.authorCisłak-Wójcik, Aleksandra
dc.contributor.authorFormanowicz, Magdalena
dc.date.access2026-03-03
dc.date.accessioned2026-03-04T08:47:41Z
dc.date.available2026-03-04T08:47:41Z
dc.date.created2026-03-03
dc.date.issued2026-03-03
dc.description.abstract<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p> We examined gender and geographical patterns of authorship ( <jats:italic>N</jats:italic>  = 1,273,571) across psychology journals listed in Scopus ( <jats:italic>N</jats:italic>  = 1,398) depending on their citation impact for 4 consecutive years (from 2020 to 2023). We observed gender balance and a dominance of authors from WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) countries in the authors sample ( <jats:italic>N</jats:italic>  = 921,411). The percentage of WEIRD authors varied as a function of journals’ impact, so that more WEIRD authors published in higher impact journals, and were more probable to be in a first and last authors position. Our findings show that while more authors from underrepresented regions are contributing to psychological journals, journals with higher prestige tend to have fewer of these authors. We also argue that the apparent 50/50 gender balance observed may still reflect representation bias, that is, an inadequate number of women as authors given base rates of their professional participation in psychology. These insights are crucial for fostering a more inclusive and representative field of psychology, which can lead to more equitable research practices and better outcomes for diverse populations. </jats:p>
dc.description.accesstimeat_publication
dc.description.grantnumber4008-A5-09
dc.description.granttitleRola mechanizmów społecznych w kształtowaniu wyników pracy naukowej—analiza naukometryczna
dc.description.sdgGenderEquality
dc.description.sdgReducedInequalities
dc.description.versionfinal_published
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11192-025-05451-7
dc.identifier.eissn1588-2861
dc.identifier.issn0138-9130
dc.identifier.urihttps://share.swps.edu.pl/handle/swps/2203
dc.identifier.weblinkhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05451-7
dc.languageen
dc.pbn.affiliationpsychologia
dc.rightsCC-BY
dc.rights.questionYes_rights
dc.share.articleOTHER
dc.subject.enDiversity
dc.subject.enMetascience
dc.subject.enScientometrics
dc.subject.enEpistemic inequality
dc.subject.enWEIRD
dc.swps.sciencecloudnosend
dc.titleWEIRD psychological science - geographical patterns of knowledge production
dc.title.journalScientometrics
dc.typeJournalArticle
dspace.entity.typeArticle