A look at the Journals in the Field of Mathematical Biology
A Diversity Perspective, by DK

Evaluating the direction of mathematical biology may be more important today than ever before. We believe that part of this evaluation entails examining exactly who are the members of the Society of Mathematical Biology, and how we can best serve their goals of research, teaching and service.

To this end, we would like to present a diversity perspective of our society's members. This information was taken from the most recent membership list available (Fall, 1996).

Total Members: SMB

Total Female Members Total Male Members Total Non-USA members

558

100 (18%)

458 (82%)

240 (43%)

These numbers are interesting. First, 43% of our cohort are non-USA members. This statistic alone may warrant careful consideration of where we hold our annual meeting each year. Second, we know that female representation in mathematics is traditionally low (~20% - Notices of AMS, 1996), and in the biological sciences traditional high (~ 42% - Science , 1996). Yet, the 18% in SMB may signal that there is an under-representation of women amongst our group. As many women begin their scientific careers, it is clear better mentoring and `advertising' efforts can and should be put into practice to encourage young scientists into this exciting field.

Other places that represent past, present and future directions for the field of mathematical biology are the journals that we publish in. We will present data for six of the top journals in mathematical biology; however, We point out that this is in no way a comprehensive list, but meant as an illustration using some of the most popular journals.

Total no. of editors No. of female editors

No. of male editors

No. of non-USA editors

No. of non-university editors(Govt or Industry)

Bulletin of Mathematical Biology

15

2 (1 repeat) (13%)

13 (87%)

10 (67%)

1 (7%)

Journal of Theoretical Biology

36

4 (1 repeat) (11%)

32 (89%)

22 (61%)

1 (3%)

Mathematical Biosciences

22

0 (0%)

22 (100%)

5 (23%)

3 (14%)

Journal of Mathematical Biology

9

0 (0%)

9 (100%)

4 (44%)

0 (0%)

Theoretical Population Biology

36

2 (6%)

34 (94%)

14 (39%)

3 (8%)

Journal of Computational Biology

53

2 (4%)

51 (96%)

10 (19%)

14 (26%) (note: only journal with Industry representation)

It is interesting that the non-USA members are well reflected in the editorialship of the journals, while the female constituents are under-represented (and sometimes, non-existent!). There are a few individuals who appear on multiple editorial boards (at least 10); one individual serves on 4 of the above 6 journals boards. The table shows 1 repeat of female representation. These repeats may reflect the fact that the society originally started out with small numbers and responsibility was shared among the members. There are, perhaps, a smaller number of senior members than junior, represented in the total of 558 for SMB. Finally, we may have to do a better job recruiting individuals to join SMB; many of the (non-managing)editors on these boards are not members of the society.

News item: The journal Nature, vol 387, May 22, 1997 has a relevant article entitled: Nepotism and Sexism in Peer-Review.

Back to SMB Newsletter