① Journal editors decide what gets published and what doesn’t, affecting the careers of other academics and influencing the direction that a field takes. You’d hope, then, that journals would do everything they can to establish a diverse editorial board, reflecting a variety of voices, experiences, and identities.

② Unfortunately a new study in Nature Neuroscience makes for disheartening reading. The team finds that the majority of editors in top psychology and neuroscience journals are male and based in the United States: a situation that may be amplifying existing gender inequalities in the field and influencing the kind of research that gets published.

③ Men were found to account for 60% of the editors of psychology journals. There were significantly more male than female editors at each level of seniority, and men made up the majority of editors in over three quarters of the journals. Crucially, the proportion of female editors was significantly lower than the overall proportion of women psychology researchers.

④ The differences were even starker in the neuroscience journals: 70% of editors were male, and men held the majority of editorial positions in 88% of journals. In this case, the proportion of female editors was not significantly lower than the proportion of female researchers working in neuroscience — a finding that reveals enduring gender disparities in the field more broadly.

⑤ Based on their results, the team concludes that “the ideas, values and decision-making biases of men are overrepresented in the editorial positions of the most recognized academic journals in psychology and neuroscience. ”

⑥ Gender inequality in science is often attributed to the fact that senior academics are more likely to be male, because historically science was male-dominated: it’s argued that as time goes on and more women rise to senior roles, the field will become more equal. Yet this study showed that even the junior roles in psychology journals tended to be held disproportionately by men, despite the fact that there are actually more female than male junior psychology faculty.

⑦ This implies that a lack of female academics is not the problem.  Instead, there are structural reasons that women are disadvantaged in science. Women receive lower salaries and face greater childcare demands, for instance, which can result in fewer publications and grants — the kinds of things that journals look for when deciding who to appoint. Rather than simply blaming the inequality of editorial boards on tradition, we should be actively breaking down these existing barriers.

1.1. What would we expect an editorial board of an academic journal to exhibit in view of its important responsibilities?

A Insight.

B Expertise.

C Integrity.

D Diversity.

解析：选D。D 细节理解题。文章第①段明确提到：“You’d hope, then, that journals would do everything they can to establish a diverse editorial board, reflecting a variety of voices, experiences, and identities.” 这句话直接表达了人们对学术期刊编辑委员会的期望——具备多样性。其他选项（Insight、Expertise、Integrity）虽可能与编辑职责相关，但文章未在此处强调，而是重点突出“多样性”的重要性。因此，正确答案为D。

2.2. What do we learn from the findings of a new study in Nature Neuroscience?

A The majority of top psychology and neuroscience journals reflect a variety of voices, experiences and identities.

B The editorial boards of most psychology and neuroscience journals do influence the direction their field takes.

C The editorial boards of the most important journals in psychology and neuroscience are male-dominated.

D The majority of editors in top psychology and neuroscience journals have relevant backgrounds.

解析：选C。C 细节理解题。文章第②段指出：“The team finds that the majority of editors in top psychology and neuroscience journals are male and based in the United States...” 后续第③、④段通过具体数据（如心理学期刊中60%的编辑为男性，神经科学期刊中这一比例达70%）进一步证实了编辑团队以男性为主导的现象。选项A与文章内容相反；选项B虽可能成立，但研究重点并非编辑委员会的影响力，而是其性别构成；选项D未在文中提及。因此，正确答案为C。

3.3. What fact does the author highlight concerning the gender differences in editors of psychology journals?

A There were quite a few female editors who also distinguished themselves as influential psychology researchers.

B The number of female editors was simply disproportionate to that of women engaged in psychology research.

C The proportion of female editors was increasingly lower at senior levels.

D There were few female editors who could move up to senior positions.

解析：选B。B 细节理解题。第③段末尾明确指出：“Crucially, the proportion of female editors was significantly lower than the overall proportion of women psychology researchers.” 这表明女性编辑的比例远低于女性心理学研究人员的比例，二者之间存在显著失衡。选项A、C、D均未在文中直接体现或与数据矛盾。因此，正确答案为B。

4.4. What can we infer from the conclusion drawn by the team of the new study on the basis of their findings?

A Women’s views are underrepresented in the editorial boards of top psychology and neuroscience journals.

B Male editors of top psychology and neuroscience journals tend to be biased against their female colleagues.

C Male researchers have enough representation in the editorial boards to ensure their publications.

D Female editors have to struggle to get women’s research articles published in academic journals.

解析：选A。A 推理判断题。第⑤段提到，研究团队得出结论：“the ideas, values and decision-making biases of men are overrepresented...” 由此可推断，男性的观点被过度代表，反之意味着女性的观点未被充分代表。选项B（男性编辑对女性同事有偏见）、选项C（男性研究员有足够代表性）、选项D（女性编辑需挣扎求存）均属于过度推断或未在文中直接支持的信息。因此，正确答案为A。

5.5. What does the author suggest we do instead of simply blaming the inequality of editorial boards on tradition?

A Strike a balance between male and female editors.

B Increase women’s employment in senior positions.

C Enlarge the body of female academics.

D Implement overall structural reforms.

解析：选D。D 细节理解题。第⑦段末尾明确建议：“Rather than simply blaming the inequality of editorial boards on tradition, we should be actively breaking down these existing barriers.” 这些障碍包括女性薪资更低、育儿压力更大等结构性原因。因此，作者呼吁打破结构性壁垒，而非仅仅调整性别比例（选项A）、增加女性高层就业（选项B）或扩大女性学者数量（选项C）。正确答案为D。