A Response to Gonzalez Ginocchio, Hindmoor and Stanley
| Author | Angelia R Wilson |
| Date | 01 February 2022 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1478929921989203 |
| Published date | 01 February 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Pluralism and Political Studies in the UK |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929921989203
Political Studies Review
2022, Vol. 20(1) 27 –29
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1478929921989203
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
A Response to Gonzalez
Ginocchio, Hindmoor
and Stanley
Angelia R Wilson
Abstract
A response to Pluralism and Political Studies in the UK: A Pilot Study into Who Gets What in the
Discipline by Brenda Gonzalez Ginocchio, Andrew Hindmoor and Liam Stanley.
Keywords
political studies, pluralism
Accepted: 18 December 2020
Brenda Gonzalez Ginocchio, Andrew Hindmoor and Liam Stanley focus on the question
‘who gets what, when and how’ to help us recognize the politics within discipline. This
piece is a welcome contribution to a discussion about diversity in the profession – one
that began with calls from second-wave feminists and now encompasses a wider range of
voices articulating the benefits of pluralism.
Every research project has to set limits on data collection and I fully appreciate that to
investigate the reach of pluralism, the authors have captured a snapshot of what is consid-
ered by some as the ‘top-layer’ of the discipline: Russell Group universities, two respected
disciplinary journals and signifiers of recognition (e.g. journal editors, prize winners,
Political Studies Association (PSA) leadership). As they note, the data are limited, with,
for example, little representation of our IR/Security Studies colleagues. Their findings –
lack of pluralism at this ‘top’ – come as no surprise. Such is the state of the discipline.
However, one should not take away from this that the discipline is all ‘pale, male and
stale’. They note increasing evidence of a (slow) reduction in the gender gap as well as
more equity in both journal editorships and PSA leadership positions. This echoes formal
feedback from the PSA Annual Conference attendees of a recognizable shift in the
demography of participants (more representation in gender, race and age) and a diversity
of panel topics. While this piece provides compelling evidence of ‘who gets what, when
and how’, it inevitably raises questions of ‘why?’ and ‘what can be done?’.
Politics Department, University of Manchester, UK
Corresponding author:
Angelia R Wilson, Politics, Arthur Lewis Building, University of Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Email: angelia.r.wilson@manchester.ac.uk
989203PSW0010.1177/1478929921989203Political Studies ReviewWilson
research-article2021
Response
To continue reading
Request your trial