Recommendation 3. Recruit Broadly and Intentionally

As noted earlier in this Toolkit, diverse editorial boards and reviewer pools raise confidence in an equitable peer review process. When working toward the trusted advancement of a given field, having a diversity of contributors across both editorial boards and the peer review process positions journals to draw on a range of perspectives and expertise, distribute unbiased decision-making influence, and strengthen innovation and performance (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020).

Depending on a journal’s editorial structure, peer review model, and business needs, there are typically a number of editorial roles. In the next two sections, we focus on the following: managing or executive editor, editor or editor-in chief, associate or senior editor, editorial board member, and peer reviewer (Table 1).

Table 1. Key roles in the editorial and peer review processes

All of these positions likely require some level of recruitment, election, and/or nomination; however, selection procedures for editorial roles may vary based on a publisher’s or journal’s business model and may be restricted by bylaws or other parameters. As such, the practices outlined below can be applied to any open position that requires some level of recruitment, while also recognizing that there are other variables a journal and publisher must keep in mind. While some editorial appointments, such as consulting editors on editorial boards, are selected primarily to support the journal’s peer review needs, most journals must seek additional ad hoc reviewers to cover the breadth and depth of submissions. The process for identifying appropriate reviewers and expanding the potential reviewer pool requires a somewhat different approach than recruitment for editorial boards. See Recommendation 4 for information on building a pipeline of trained, diverse reviewers.

Position Descriptions and Postings

Position descriptions and/or postings are a candidate’s first interaction with a role. They are the mechanism by which a staff or editorial leader articulates a position’s responsibilities, scope, and any essential qualities needed. Inclusive descriptions actively welcome candidates from across the spectrum of human diversity and avoid criteria that may potentially exclude competent candidates.

• Thoughtfully consider criteria. When developing or updating a role posting, consider preferred characteristics, background, and core strengths—rather than teachable skills, prestige, or acquired position—as criteria. Some members of persistently marginalized groups who are highly competent may not have had others’ privileges to attain prestigious positions, receive awards or recognition, or have vast publication histories or citations. Additionally, women are less likely to apply to positions unless they meet most or all of the criteria (Ignatova, 2019).

  To make the position more appealing to all candidates, consider focusing on the position objectives, scope, and “nice to have” characteristics rather than outlining a checklist of requirements.

• Use neutral, clear language and avoid biased terminology. Biased and/or unclear language may unintentionally turn away or even exclude certain applicants. For example, gendered language such as “he” and “him” pronouns may deter women or nonbinary candidates from applying or seeing themselves in the position. Instead, the use of gender-neutral pronouns such as “they” and “them” for prospective candidates allows everyone to feel a sense of belonging and qualification for the role.

  • Understand if your organization uses or has its own style guide related to job descriptions. It is worth noting that standards for inclusive language evolve with societal standards and should be periodically re-evaluated. Example style guides can be found in the Resources section.

  • Specialized language programs can review role descriptions, flag biased language, and suggest more neutral replacements. While your organization or Human Resources department may have access to such programs, there are also free tools available (some with paid features), such as Gender Decoder and eploy.

  • Include a specific “ask” in the role description. For example: “Individuals from persistently excluded communities are invited to apply.” While you might think that approach is assumed, such statements demonstrate to applicants that the organization and/or publication prioritizes DEIA and welcomes applicants of any background. It can create a sense of safety and belonging before a candidate even applies.

• Conduct a group review of calls for nominations and role descriptions. Having a diverse group of staff and/or editorial leadership read any candidate-facing materials before they are finalized means that the recruiting and hiring authority is distributed and not resting with any one individual.

• Allow open calls for nomination and self-nomination. Nominations for open editorial leadership positions often occur through existing editorial networks or through public calls to nominate a peer. Some members of marginalized groups may not be connected to these networks and/or may be less likely to have peers or mentors willing to advocate for them. There may be additional discomfort in asking a peer or mentor to nominate them. Open calls for nomination including self-nomination reach the widest pool of interested applicants. Examples:

  • A recent poster presentation by Adrianna Borgia at the 2023 conference of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (2023; see Cuomo, 2022) examined the implementation of an open editorial board process in detail for the journal Microbiology Spectrum. (More information on providing paths for prospective reviewers is provided in the next section.)

  • The American Psychological Association maintains webpages with both open calls for nominations of editor positions and nominations of editorial fellowship positions.

  • The Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics invites rolling suggestions for SIAM Journal editorial board candidates through their Editor Nominee Form.

Recruitment and Outreach Strategy

Inviting a diverse contributor base requires an inclusive and equitable outreach strategy. Prioritizing inclusion throughout the recruitment and selection processes can help break historical cycles of exclusion and privilege in editorial leadership and reviewer positions.

• Recruit more broadly and intentionally to persistently marginalized communities. Thoughtfully crafted position descriptions can only go so far if they are not posted and shared widely. Unless actively invited, individuals from persistently marginalized groups may not consider applying or participating. Consider intentionally seeking out organizations and institutions that promote opportunities for these groups. Institutions might also be willing to collaborate to mutually provide professional opportunities for their doctoral candidates. Examples include The PhD Project, which helps to build a diverse pipeline of business school faculty through mentorship and training; and Editors of Color, which maintains a list of field-specific diverse databases across disciplines.

• Leverage existing programs within your organization. Your organization may already have established programs or community groups in place that bring together people of color, early career academics, mentors/mentees, women, or other communities. Consider reaching out to these groups to share the position posting and request nominations.

• Expand your network. Nominations for editorial leadership positions and reviewers often come from existing editors’ professional networks. Editors themselves are often selected in part for their vast professional networks. By expanding and diversifying your network as an editor (or, as a publisher, by encouraging and providing tools for editors to expand their networks), it will be easier to nominate individuals for editorial roles, or to select reviewers from underrepresented groups.

• Leverage other tools to identify prospective candidates. Consider creative mechanisms for identifying candidates and reviewers. When possible, reach out to individuals directly to gauge their interest before you nominate them for a position or invite them to review a manuscript. Opportunities include:

  • Recent presenters or speakers at industry or academic conferences

  • Search tools and/or databases made available in the submission system or by the publisher

  • Specific article reference lists

  • Frequent and/or reliable reviewers who have already reviewed for the journal

• Consider ways to make the selection and interview processes more fair and transparent.

  • Selection by committee. For editorial positions—especially where there are open calls and self-nominations—selection by a diverse group of individuals supports an unbiased and distributed evaluation of the candidates, and the committee’s procedures and discussion criteria should facilitate this. If time allows, share the committee names with the candidates in advance so they can adequately prepare.

  • Interview structure. Sticking to a standardized set of questions can also reduce bias in interviews. While sometimes the conversation may flow off topic or you might hit it off with a specific candidate, adhering to the same general structure and ordered question list ensures that all candidates have the opportunity to respond to the same prompts and that your personal opinion does not overshadow your professional evaluation of their qualities. Sharing the questions in advance may also give candidates adequate preparation time and result in a more robust understanding of their potential.

  • Communicate with the candidates throughout the process. Many of us have experienced the anxiety of waiting for an update after an interview. As a professional courtesy, share the expected timeline with all candidates and provide updates as needed. If candidates do not get the position, sharing feedback may help them in the future and encourage them to continue applying for such roles.

Create alternative opportunities for early career researchers to gain editorial experience.

Creating roles in a journal specifically for early career researchers gives them experience with the journal process and provides the journal with fresh perspectives, while helping to expand the reviewer pool and investing in future editorial position candidates. Examples include:

• Early career researchers on editorial boards: Including early career researchers in this way provides them with experience in curating special issues, writing blogs, communicating through social media, reviewing papers, and more. This can be done either by having a dedicated board of early career researchers or intentionally inviting early career researchers to your existing editorial board.

• Guest editor, editorial fellowship, and reviewer roles: Create opportunities for early career scholars in guest editor, fellowship, and co-reviewer roles. Examples include:

  • Big Data and Society: This journal maintains a board of assistant editors, supporting opportunities for early-stage scholars to network and gain experience in the peer review process.

  • Translational Issues in Psychological Science: Associate editors for this journal are all advanced postdoctoral students or early career researchers.

  • ASCO Journals: This portfolio-wide program is designed to introduce oncology fellows and trainees to the editorial process, leading up to a final project reporting on their experience.

  • Editorial fellowships with APA journals: Editors of several journals published by the American Psychological Association offer fellowships for early career researchers, which welcome applications from researchers from marginalized communities. Editorial fellows are mentored by editors and gain experience in making editorial decisions based on peer reviews.

• Additional professional development: Consider other ways you can provide opportunities for early career researchers to present research in their field, including inviting them to participate in symposia at conferences or to write editorial or book reviews.