PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10

Streamlining for excellence discriminates against women: A study of research productivity of 2.7 mln scientists in 45 countries
(Center for Open Science, 2022)
Letki, Natalia
;
Biały, Grzegorz
;
Sankowski, Piotr
;
Walentek, Dawid
Gender inequality in academia is well documented yet persistently difficult to eradicate. Here, we adopt a new perspective by investigating the effect of institutional design on gender gap in research productivity on the example of habilitation - a centralized performance assessment procedure. Using a new, population-based dataset comprising 2,704,688 researchers from 45 countries we show that the presence of a habilitation has unexpected gendering counter-effect on research productivity, as it systematically lowers performance of female, but not male researchers. We also show that while international mobility improves research productivity of both genders in both systems, in systems without habilitation the selection effect for mobile women is particularly strong, and their returns to mobility in terms of increased productivity are the smallest of all mobile groups. We conclude that centralised, top-down regulation of `excellence in science' causes irreparable damage to careers of female researchers.
Are female scientists less inclined to publish alone? The gender solo research gap Open PDF
(2022)
Kwiek, M.
;
Roszka, W.
In solo research, scientists compete individually for prestige, sending clear signals about their research ability, avoiding problems in credit allocation, and reducing conflicts about authorship. We examine to what extent male and female scientists differ in their use of solo publishing across various dimensions. This research is the first to comprehensively study the “gender solo research gap” among all internationally visible scientists within a whole national higher education system. We examine the gap through mean “individual solo publishing rates” found in “individual publication portfolios” constructed for each Polish university professor. We use the practical significance/statistical significance difference (based on the effect-size r coefficient) and our analyses indicate that while some gender differences are statistically significant, they have no practical significance. Using a partial effects of fractional logistic regression approach, we estimate the probability of conducting solo research. In none of the models does gender explain the variability of the individual solo publishing rate. The strongest predictor of individual solo publishing rate is the average team size, publishing in STEM fields negatively affects the rate, publishing in male-dominated disciplines positively affects it, and the influence of international collaboration is negative. The gender solo research gap in Poland is much weaker than expected: within a more general trend toward team research and international research, gender differences in solo research are much weaker and less relevant than initially assumed. We use our unique biographical, administrative, publication, and citation database (“Polish Science Observatory”) with metadata on all Polish scientists present in Scopus (N = 25,463) and their 158,743 Scopus-indexed articles published in 2009–2018, including 18,900 solo articles. © 2022, The Author(s).
A Retrospective of Women Entrepreneurship Research and Future Research Directions
(2024)
Iqbal, S.
;
Farrukh, M.
;
Bhaumik, A.
Entrepreneurship, and especially the involvement of women, is crucial to the advancement of the economy and society as a whole. By using bibliometric analysis, this article gives a thorough review of contemporary research on women’s entrepreneurship. This study examines a variety of factors, including countries, academic publications, authors and suggested areas for further research. The study’s objectives are to guide future research, educate policymakers and serve as a resource for researchers interested in furthering the study of women’s entrepreneurship and its societal implications. © 2024 MDI.
Does a gender-neutral name associate with the research impact of a scientist? Open PDF
(2022)
Zhang, N.
;
He, G.
;
Shi, D.
;
Zhao, Z.
;
Li, J.
Women have long suffered in both academia and industry from lower status, underrepresentation, unequal treatment, and other challenges based on gender. This paper explores whether a gender-neutral name is associated with the research impact of a scientist by examining three years of citations. The data for this study are derived from publications indexed in ISI's Web of Science (WoS) database from 2009 to 2015. By assigning a name neutralization index score to each author, we investigate the relationship between the neutralization index and citations and find the following results: (1) generally, the more neutral the name, the more citations the publications received; (2) the neutral effect was more pronounced for authors with feminine names than for authors with masculine names. © 2022
Equity for women in science: dismantling systemic barriers to advancement
(Harvard university press, 2023)
Sugimoto, Cassidy R.
;
Larivière, Vincent
The success of the scientific endeavor depends on a robust workforce. Unfortunately, the scientific workforce fails to be representative of the population. This failure to adequately utilize human capital has strong consequences for progress and innovation. This book examines the labor of women in science. Combining an extensive analysis of several international datasets on scholarly publications, research funding, and survey results, this book provides an empirical account of the various ways the gender gap is observed in the scientific community and combines these findings with anecdotes and profiles of women in science that provide historical context and guide the empirical analysis
Making sense of glass ceiling: A bibliometric analysis of conceptual framework, intellectual structure and research publications Open PDF
(Cogent OA, 2023)
Singh, S.
;
Sharma, C.
;
Bali, P.
;
Sharma, S.
;
Shah, M.A.
In life and employment, women face discrimination. The glass ceiling prohibits women from obtaining top management and leadership positions in male-dominated sectors. This study has conducted bibliometric analyses to analyze and highlight the glass ceiling literature. Authors searched international conferences and journals for relevant papers. This study evaluates 1,199 publications from the Scopus database’s core collection between 1988 and 2021 to visualize the Glass ceiling. This research analyses co-occurrence, co-citation, and bibliographic coupling to discover the field’s most important subjects, authors, and works. The extent of the glass ceiling, current publication patterns, significant regions, key articles, and critical publications were also studied. This research reveals that the glass ceiling is evolving. This research delivers vital insights and conclusions on the glass ceiling’s future. Also, rich and developing nations have significant knowledge differences. © 2023 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
Women are Credited Less in Science than are Men Open PDF
(2022)
Ross, Matthew B.
;
Glennon, Britta M.
;
Murciano-Goroff, Raviv
;
Berkes, Enrico G.
;
Weinberg, Bruce A.
There is a well-documented gap in the observed number of scientific works produced by women and men in science, with clear consequences for the retention and promotion of women in science1. The gap might be a result of productivity differences2-5, or it might be due to women's contributions not being acknowledged6,7. This paper finds that at least part of this gap is due to the latter: women in research teams are significantly less likely to be credited with authorship than are men. The findings are consistent across three very different sources of data. Analysis of the first source - large scale administrative data on research teams, team scientific output, and attribution of credit - show that women are significantly less likely to be named on any given article or patent produced by their team relative to their peers. The gender gap in attribution is found across almost all scientific fields and career stages. The second source - an extensive survey of authors - similarly shows that women's scientific contributions are systematically less likely to be recognized. The third source - qualitative responses - suggests that the reason is that their work is often not known, not appreciated, or ignored. At least some of the observed gender gap in scientific output may not be due to differences in scientific contribution, but to differences in attribution.
Do women undertake interdisciplinary research more than men, and do self-citations bias observed differences? Open PDF
(2022)
Pinheiro, H.
;
Durning, M.
;
Campbell, D.
Some studies have shown that women undertake interdisciplinary research more than men, whereas other studies have shown no difference by gender. Women have also been shown to self-cite less often than men, a difference at least partly mediated through differences in career stages and prior productivity. Existing evidence on gender-based differences in interdisciplinarity may therefore be biased. If interdisciplinarity is inferred from the disciplinary diversity of a paper’s cited references, a greater share of self-citations by men could decrease their measured interdisciplinarity relative to women. Such biases could lead to erroneous conclusions, because after correcting for self-citations one might uncover that women participate in interdisciplinary research equally to, or less than, men. Given that funding for interdisciplinary research is gaining in importance, obtaining accurate measurements of interdisciplinarity by gender is highly relevant for funders so that they can take appropriate action(s) in leveling the playing field across gender. For instance, evidence suggests women are sometimes advised not to participate in interdisciplinary research due to the risk it represents for their career progression. This study shows that a paper’s interdisciplinarity increases with the presence of female authors, accounting or not for self-citations in the interdisciplinarity measurement. © 2022 Henrique Pinheiro, Matt Durning, and David Campbell.
A push for inclusive data collection in STEM organizations Open PDF
(American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2022)
Burnett, Nicholas P.
;
Hernandez, Alyssa M.
;
King, Emily E.
;
Tanner, Richelle L.
;
Wilsterman, Kathryn
Professional organizations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are well-positioned to improve the recruitment and retention (R&R) of underrepresented groups (1, 2) by providing targeted professional development, networking opportunities, and political advocacy (3, 4). Tailoring these initiatives to specific underrepresented groups can enhance their impact (5), but this is predicated on organizations knowing their demographic make-up (6). Here, we report patterns in STEM organizations’ collection and usage of demographic data from members and conference attendees, based on information from 73 professional societies representing 712,000 constituents. In light of inconsistencies and limitations that we observed, we suggest survey programs that can serve as models for inclusive survey designs by organizations and, where possible, provide demographic information for benchmarking relative to the general population. With improved surveys, organizations can leverage demographic data to prioritize and evaluate R&R efforts, and share effective strategies for R&R of underrepresented groups across STEM. Baseline demographic data, when compared to the general population (across STEM or across a country), can help organizations set and prioritize R&R goals and, when monitored over time, help organizations evaluate the effectiveness of R&R efforts. Government agencies often provide the most relevant demographic data for a general population in STEM (e.g., the US National Science Foundation) and in a country (e.g., the US Census Bureau) because of their surveys’ large sample sizes and broad distributions. As a result, organizations may be compelled to use government surveys as a model for demographic survey design and for benchmarking (i.e., comparing their organization’s demographic diversity to the general population). Although these agencies survey many categories of demographic information (e.g., gender identity, family status, citizenship, abilities, race and ethnicity), they do not necessarily collect all the demographic information that is considered meaningful to describe the STEM community—i.e., treating some groups as homogeneous (7) and ignoring other groups completely (8). By contrast, inclusive demographic surveys acknowledge the full diversity of identities that are meaningful among members of the STEM community. Thus, organizations seeking to describe their demographic composition are pressured to choose between following the examples of government agencies versus creating new, inclusive surveys to recognize additional (and evolving) identities within the STEM community.
On authorship and gender equityEquity for Women in Science: Dismantling Systemic Barriers to Advancement Cassidy R. Sugimoto and Vincent Larivière Harvard University Press, 2023. 272 pp Open PDF
(2023)
Blair-Loy, M.
An analysis of research papers finds differences in article production and recognition for women scientists.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results