Abstract
Abstract This article uses quantitative and qualitative methods to explore persistent gender biases in fifteen years of book reviews in the Journal of the American Academy of Religion (2006–2020). The JAAR has historically reviewed books by men and relied on male reviewers out of proportion to their share of the academy’s membership. Although these rates have shifted toward balance over time, sexist biases in reviewers’ language and citation practices persist. In keeping with other research on gendered agency in language, we find that reviewers of all genders emphasize male scholars’ expertise and esteem and disproportionately refer to male thinkers and their ideas in reviews, with male reviewers also citing work by men at a much higher rate. We argue that these practices, which both reflect and compound existing inequalities in the field of religious studies as well as in academia and society broadly, should be changed and suggest some strategies for reviewers, editors, and journals to adopt.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
