Acting as a timely supplement to the recent Healy data, a group of female philosophers has begun an analogous effort to our Gendered Conference Campaign – the Gendered Citation Campaign (they’re calling it the GCC2). It’s an effort to raise awareness about the apparent under-citation of female philosophers, and to encourage philosophers to consider gender when compiling a reference list. (Unlike the sciences, there is little pressure in philosophy to be completeist about referencing, so it’s easy to just reference to first few articles that come to mind – and that’s a strategy that’s likely to favor male authors, given what we know about implicit bias.)
The GCC2 has begun compiling information here. Three important points that should be emphasized about this information. The first is that the methodology here is not that of random representative sampling. Instead, the data gatherers decided to look, at least to begin with, only at the first issue of 2010 for journals that they easily laid their hands on. The second point is that the intent is not to suggest that the authors of papers with few or no citations of women are blameworthy. The goal, rather, is to raise awareness of the issue of gendered citation as a systematic phenomenon. And finally, one helpful thing about this information is that it gives some indication that the under-citation of women isn’t a phenomenon that’s limited to Mind, Nous, Philosophical Review, and Journal of Philosophy.
I should perhaps further add that, though we’re helping to publicize this venture, the GCC2 isn’t organized by this blog. We’ll link to any updates to this information as and when they come to us, but we’re not compiling the information ourselves.
Feminist Philosophers 
congratulations for the blog!
I am glad to see this work. I think that it is very important.
What Carla said.
Is there a website or such? The Google Doc doesn’t seem to include contact information, how one can participate, what the purpose of the spreadsheet is, etc.
[…] Citation tells us part of the story – and the story it tells is a grim one. But there’s more to including women in a conversation than merely citing women. There’s also having the work of women truly engaged with, discussed, talked about the way we discuss the work of men. Hopefully that’s something we can strive for as we try to cite women more often. […]
Hi Dan,
Sorry it’s taken so long to reply to your comment. I was sort of hoping someone involved in running the GCC2 would show up to answer your question, since they’ll have more information than I do. But anyway, as far as I know there’s no website, and they aren’t currently soliciting contributions of additional information or examples of gendered citation. I suspect that the googledoc is something the organizers will add to as and when they have time, but I don’t know that for sure.
[…] less so of their writings. Clearly, these women could have done with the gendered conference and citation campaigns! But as it is, if we want a female perpective on ancient philosophy, we have to do the […]
[…] “Estuve pensando en un test análogo al de Bechdel para artículos de filosofía, a la luz de las observaciones que se han hecho recientemente de que las mujeres son menos citadas incluso si publican en las revistas “top” de filosofía general (ver también aquí). […]