Abstract
McSweeney and Swindell (1998) sought to determine whether men and women are treated equitably in the experimental analysis of behavior. They purported to show that women participate less in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior than in similar journals and that the participation of women decreases with increases in selectivity. Their data were difficult to interpret, however, because they did not present the variability in the mean data drawn from different individuals over time. My analyses were not in accord with their conclusions. When the percentage of associate editors who are women was considered along with the mean percentages McSweeney and Swindell reported for other measures, participation did not systematically decrease with increases in selectivity in recent years. As quantified in terms of their number of publications in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, women who were editorial board members and associate editors were not more highly selected than their male counterparts. Finally, in the recent period from 1996 to 1998, although women submitted fewer manuscripts to the journal, rejection ratios did not differ for men and women. Efforts to increase the participation of women in the experimental analysis of behavior may best be directed toward recruitment and retention rather than some of the suggestions proposed by McSweeney and Swindell (1998), which could inadvertently create different standards for women's work.
Keywords: participation of women, gender equity, experimental analysis of behavior, Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Baer D. M. "Perhaps it would be better not to know everything.". J Appl Behav Anal. 1977 Spring;10(1):167–172. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1977.10-167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Iwata B. A., Lent C. E. Participation by women in behavior analysis: Some recent data on authorship of manuscripts submitted to the journal of applied behavior analysis. Behav Anal. 1984 Spring;7(1):77–78. doi: 10.1007/BF03391891. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laties V. G. Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior: The first thirty years (1957-1987). J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Nov;48(3):495–512. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-495. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McSweeney F. K., Donahoe P., Swindell S. Women in applied behavior analysis. Behav Anal. 2000 Fall;23(2):267–277. doi: 10.1007/BF03392015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McSweeney F. K., Swindell S. Women in the experimental analysis of behavior. Behav Anal. 1998 Fall;21(2):193–202. doi: 10.1007/BF03391963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Michael J. Statistical inference for individual organism research: mixed blessing or curse? J Appl Behav Anal. 1974 Winter;7(4):647–653. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1974.7-647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Myers D. L. More participation by women in behavior analysis: Reply to Neef. Behav Anal. 1993 Fall;16(2):361–363. doi: 10.1007/BF03392646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Myers D. L. Participation by women in behavior analysis. II: 1992. Behav Anal. 1993 Spring;16(1):75–86. doi: 10.1007/BF03392613. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Neef N. A. Response to Myers on participation of women in behavior analysis: Right problem, wrong source. Behav Anal. 1993 Fall;16(2):357–359. doi: 10.1007/BF03392645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Poling A., Grossett D., Fulton B., Roy S., Beechler S., Wittkopp C. J. Participation by women in behavior analysis. Behav Anal. 1983 Fall;6(2):145–152. doi: 10.1007/BF03392393. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]