Abstract
ABSTRACTResearch on the political science profession has shown that homophilous research networks—that is, those organized along the lines of gender and race/ethnicity—reproduce hierarchies. Research networks composed of white men experience the most prestige and lead to the most opportunities. This study documents homophilous networks in a setting where they likely are nurtured: academic conferences. Drawing data from the 2019 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, we examine the correspondence between the gender and the racial/ethnic composition of section members, panelists, and audience members for four research sections: Political Methodology; Political Psychology; Race, Ethnicity, and Politics; and Women and Politics. We find that attendees’ and panelists’ gender and racial/ethnic identity largely mirror the dominant gender and racial/ethnic group in their section. These findings indicate that homophily manifests at academic conferences and that efforts to diversify research networks should consider who listens to whom in these settings.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference26 articles.
1. Revisiting the Presence of Women in Political Science Journal Editorial Positions;Palmer;PS: Political Science and Politics,2020
2. Negating the Gender Citation Advantage in Political Science;Atchison;PS: Political Science and Politics,2017
3. Beyond the Gender Citation Gap: Comments on Dion, Sumner, and Mitchell;Brown;Political Analysis,2018
4. The Gender Readings Gap in Political Science Graduate Training;Hardt;Journal of Politics,2019
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献