A seat at the table: A short primer on addressing citational inequity

This post originally appeared on Sage Perspectives blog.

By Robert Tinkle, Publishing Editor, Humanities & Social Sciences, Sage Publishing

Asante oral tradition tells of Ananse, the spider whose beautiful and intricate webs inspired two hunters in the forests of Ghana to weave the first Asante Kente, or Kente cloth. Whereas, in the Greek arachnid myth, Athena turns Arachne into a spider and punishes her with an eternity of weaving, the Asante tale draws attention to an entangled ecosystem in which one creative patterning cites or attributes itself to a forerunner.

In today’s research ecosystem, it is equally imperative that scholars prioritize citational equity in their own research and practice, which includes crediting forerunners who have gone historically underacknowledged. Citational inequity happens when some demographics, especially those that already enjoy comparatively greater social privilege, are overrepresented in reference lists and other indexes at the expense of others. It is necessary to be conscious of these imbalances, and to actively work toward addressing them, as one part of implementing equity-oriented standards into academic practice more broadly.

To that end, this post provides some guidelines to help scholars in any field working toward greater citational equity in their own research.

Swim in the Waters

Citational equity is premised on the understanding that a diversity of voices is of inherent benefit to scholarship. Minority-identity scholars not only offer necessary critiques of the field and its oversights but also contribute regularly to research advancements, often with less acknowledgement than their more socially privileged peers receive. As the Cite Black Women Collective argues, citing marginalized and underrepresented scholars is the first step both in giving long-overdue credit and in dismantling many of the hegemonic assumptions on which research operates.

Thus, it is crucial to engage with—and give appropriate credit to—scholars of color, women, queer, gender diverse, and other minority-identity scholars as part of your regular research habits. Read the work of these scholars, invite them to key speaking engagements, and make room for them at the table. At conferences, attend sessions you might not normally attend, especially in areas that challenge dominant narratives and research practices. By working toward equity in all areas of your research, you will inevitably produce reference lists that reflect the real diversity of the field.

Avoid the Silo

Minority-identity scholars make significant contributions to all areas of research, not just to those that bear on their personal identities or the communities to which they belong. Don’t make the mistake of citing queer scholars only while working in queer studies, or Black and Indigenous scholars only while working in critical race theory. Something like the converse is also true: there are excellent scholars working in fields that do not necessarily denote their own identities (male scholars that contribute to feminist theory, for example).

Be judicious in the ways that you lean on and cite any scholar working on identity-related topics. A non-Black scholar can be cited for their historical work on the American civil rights movement, but should not be cited as an authority on the Black experience. And Black scholars should be cited in all research areas they are experts in, not just those related to race or to Black identity and experience. Above all, listen to and learn from minoritized scholars when they point to citational inequities in their fields.

Use Available Tools

To redress citational inequity, some scholars have developed search tools and databases to help their fellow researchers locate them and their work, among them CiteBlackAuthors, WomenAlsoKnowStuff, and AcademiaNet. As some of these names suggest, these tools highlight biases that persist in academia and emphasize the need to unlearn assumptions about who counts as citable. Archival resources, like Brown University’s Queer and Genderqueer Media page and Rutgers University’s Scarlet & Black Digital Archive, can also be terrific starting points for finding new primary sources (and, from there, the scholars who work on them). Note that even important tools like these have their limitations; for example, search results in databases dedicated to women scholars tend to yield predominantly white, Western women. Because identity is complex and intersectional, the temptation to narrow or simplify it must always be avoided.

Sage’s DEI statement outlines our own commitment to antiracist and decolonized research. Our Inclusive Language Guide and DEI Guidelines for Authors are an aid to using appropriate language for identity-related topics, and our Unconscious Bias Guide can assist editors in publishing inclusive, bias-free content.

Always Audit!

Be diligent about auditing your references to ensure you haven’t privileged certain voices over others. This does not always mean striking a perfect balance among identity categories. For example, an autoethnography of the Asian-American experience in a rural Midwest healthcare system will likely (in fact, should likely) cite Asian-American scholars more abundantly than others. The practice of auditing is meant to ensure that essential voices have not been left out of the conversation.

To help rectify global imbalances in scholarship and citational practice, make the effort to cite more scholars from non-Western institutions. It is also critical to dismantle power asymmetries in the research process itself (as this excellent editorial in the journal Autism discusses). Finally, as you audit, avoid making assumptions about scholars’ personal identities based on their names, surnames, or physical appearance alone.

In Summary…

Historical biases which persist into the present day have privileged the work of scholars who are white, male, Western, and socially and financially advantaged, both in the academy itself and in the algorithmic and citational practices that have been developed to discover scholarly work. Because of these entrenched biases, you may have to put in additional effort to engage scholars of color, women, and other marginalized voices who are doing important work in your field. Know that this additional effort is both necessary and worth it for the betterment of all research and the diverse communities engaged in it.