5 ms·

I find this paper a bit confusing. Authors use "woman", "men", "male" and "female" interchangeably at beginning. Latter to stay on safe side they use word "sex

I find this paper a bit confusing. Authors use "woman", "men", "male" and "female" interchangeably at beginning. Latter to stay on safe side they use word "sex". But try to determine that from persons name and images! Perhaps authors should first define what they are trying to measure. And then ask people about their sex and gender identity! Guessing core data makes this paper totally random and irrelevant! From paper: > In line with the practice of previous research on sex representation on editorial boards, we coded the sex of academics according to whether their names were clearly male or female (e.g. Ioannidou & Rosiana 2015). When this was not obvious we used Google Search to find their sex from pictures or left the sex variable missing when this was insufficient. Of the 5,625 editorial board members in our dataset, we were unable to determine the sex of 7 individuals.

user- 4y ago
This was actually pointed out in the "peer" (laughable to call it that) review of the paper. The data this rag was based on was flawed from the start. > You should use the term ‘sex’ rather than ’gender’, because your use of categories (male vs. female) indicates it is biological sex you are considering. In fact, you inconsistently use sex 20 times and gender 20 times in the ms. > The problem is tricky because our survey used the term gender rather than sex. We have only used the term gender when referring to the survey questions and have explained why in a footnote at the start of the survey section. We forgot to explain that we had made this change in our last communication with the reviewer, but we hope you find this approach reasonable. Admittedly, a few other ‘genders’ were added by accident in past reviews.