National heterogeneity and disparity in academic gatekeeping

Abstract Geographical representation of reviewers is a critical dimension of disparity in the peer review process. To investigate its relationship with gatekeeping behavior, this paper uses manuscript metadata from Elsevier's peer review platform, supplemented by national‐level indicators of economic development and of political and cultural dimensions. Accounting for national differences in publication output, we develop country‐level metrics of peer review representativeness and review duration. Our analysis reveals that, compared to North America and Western Europe, countries in Asia and Africa remain markedly underrepresented in gatekeeping. We also observe that reviewers based in Central America and Africa tend to exhibit slower review turnaround times. To further elucidate the structural underpinnings behind these disparities, we employ regression analyses linking national characteristics to gatekeeping behavior. Results suggest that countries that are overrepresented in gatekeeping tend to share similar political and cultural profiles. Specifically, countries with stronger governance frameworks tend to be structurally overrepresented as gatekeepers; editorial processes appear faster in cultures with a stronger orientation toward planning, whereas reviewers from countries characterized by higher levels of risk preference tend to show lower sensitivity to time constraints. These findings provide new empirical support for calls to advance equity in global academic participation.