Date (This field will be auto-populated in WordPress)

Paper Title: Disadvantages in preparing and publishing scientific papers caused by the dominance of the English language in science: The case of Colombian researchers in biological sciences

Author(s) and Year: Valeria Ramírez-Castañeda, 2020

Journal: PLOS One (open access)

TL;DR: English is modern science’s common language, with up to 98% of scientific articles published in English. Most major scientific journals operate in this language, limiting a researcher’s success to their English competence. In some countries, such as Colombia, English proficiency is a privilege usually linked to a high-income background, while translation and editing services remain unattainable by most. To understand and minimize the gap in the global production and comprehension of science, it is crucial to address the hegemony of the English language as its main quality control.

Why I chose this paper: As a Mexican biologist, I can attest firsthand to how limited access to English can be in Latin American countries. For many of my peers, reading and studying articles in English required a considerable amount of extra time and some even needed extracurricular English classes just to catch up. These classes represented an extra expense of time and money, placing a considerable burden on those who can’t afford it and, in some cases, forcing them to abandon their career choice.

The Background

The hows and whys

While a common language aims to standardize global knowledge and facilitate international collaboration, it can also act as a gatekeeper to those whose access to that language is limited. Some countries with lower English proficiency are also among the ones with the biggest economic inequality, leaving researchers of already low income in need of more resources to translate and publish their investigations in the most reputable journals. As a result, what once aimed to be a global conversation becomes a close dialogue between the same global potencies.

With that in mind, Valeria Ramírez-Castañeda decided to study the economic, emotional, and time cost of publishing in English for Colombian researchers. As she stated, understanding the disadvantages faced by Colombian researchers is crucial to minimizing global inequity of science. To do so, she conducted a survey of 49 doctoral students and doctorates in the biological sciences. The survey consisted of 44 questions about the researchers’ socioeconomic background, English proficiency, number of publications, expenses for writing in English, difficulties in writing and reading in both English and Spanish, and anxiety levels when participating in conferences in English. The survey was called “Implications of language in scientific publication” and was posted on X under the hashtag #CienciaCriolla, where it remained open for two months. 

Then, to study the data, Ramírez-Castañeda separated the demography by gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic background, which unearthed some important information immediately. Only 30.2% of the participants were women, most researchers came from big cities, and undergraduate students came from middle- to high-income backgrounds. This demonstrates that some demographics are already strongly favored if they want to pursue a high-level scholarship in biological sciences, at least in Colombia.

The Results

What the survey showed

Writing in English may be problematic for the researchers who responded to the survey; however, according to the results, they still widely prefer it. As the author suggests, the reason behind this might be due to “obligation” rather than “preference,” as 92% of the articles published by these researchers were written in English. Still, 43.5% of them stated that, at least once, their work was rejected or had to be revised due to their grammar. However, as the author states, the revisions they received commonly contained colloquialisms or expressions that researchers from non-speaking English countries might not understand. 

Among Latin American countries, Colombia ranks second in economic inequality and has one of the lowest levels of English proficiency worldwide, with a direct relationship between English competence and a high-income background (Fig.  1). As a result, writing articles in English represents an enormous time expense for less privileged researchers, requiring them to spend around 211.4 hours, on average, to write an article in English, against the 114.57 hours it would take to write the same article in Spanish. That is a 96.86-hour difference. 

Because of this, 59.2% of the researchers have paid for editing services, and 28.6% have used translating services. However, the problem is only amplified when taking into account the monthly income of a PhD student in Colombia. For a 3000-word article, and considering “five of the most relevant scientific publishers,” the price of editing or translating amounts to 25% to 50% of their total monthly income.

This has forced some researchers to ask for informal assistance, i.e., non-professional help. According to the data, 93.9% of them had asked for editing favors, while 32.7% had asked for translating favors. As for international conferences, 33% of the respondents simply decided to stop attending since these conferences are commonly conducted in English. All these factors become extra time, emotional, and economic baggage that researchers from the global north don’t have to consider.

The Impact

Lack of diversity and access

Valeria Ramírez-Castañeda doesn’t argue against the importance of having a common language in science. In general, a common language is key to bridging different practices and research worldwide, making research understandable and replicable no matter where scientists are from. However, the gates that regulate the flux of scientific knowledge around the world remain closed to the unprivileged. The global integration of English in science can also work as a homogenization process that hinders the diversity of researchers and, as a result, the diversity of scientific questions asked. Quoting the author, “diversity in languages promotes diversity in thinking.”

Researchers without the means to produce science in English find refuge in national journals. However, from a global point of view, the quality of these journals is considered limited. This practice incentivizes researchers to mainly publish in international journals, leaving those who can only access national ones with limited knowledge.

Locals beyond the lab are impacted, too, as they are left without access to the science produced in their own countries, potentially affecting national policies regarding environmental and resource protection.

What are the alternatives?

A common language should work as a communication channel, not as a quality control, which is why, in the author’s opinion, a bilateral effort should be made to remediate some of the inequalities. To list a few, she suggested encouraging foreign researchers to publish in local journals, as well as supporting international journals that accept articles in different languages. She further suggests placing the weight of editing and translating on the journals, not the researchers; ensuring that international conferences adopt live translation services; and, finally, emphasizing the use of public and free translation software.

Written by Diego Ramírez Martín del Campo

Edited by Mykyta ‘Nik’ Kliapets and Madeline Fisher

Featured image credit: Gerd Altmann