PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
5 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Gender Bias in the Study of Genital Evolution: Females Continue to Receive Less Attention than Males Open PDF(2022)Orbach, D. N.The evolution of female genitalia has historically received less attention than male reproductive organs. Several papers have underscored the disparities in research efforts, but have calls for change resonated with the scientific community and rectified the skew? A literature review was conducted of journal articles published between 2013 through 2021 that explore genital evolution to determine if gender bias (sex of research subject) and imbalance (sex of researcher) have changed. Of the 334 articles that specifically explored genital evolution, first authors of both sexes published on female genitalia less than half as often as male genitalia, although the majority of authors published on genitalia of both sexes. First authors of both sexes mentioned females after males substantially more often than females before males. Female first authors published the most about genital evolution in all taxa except for insects and arachnids. Female first authors published in high impact journals marginally less often than male first authors. Articles about genital evolution across taxa generally had high impact factors, but how impact factors and number of citations varied by the sex of the subject was not clear. Although the number of studies exploring genital co-evolution between the sexes has increased across taxa and years, female genitalia continue to be researched less often than male genitalia when only one sex is investigated. Both female and male scientists are publishing in the field of genital evolution, although research on female subjects continue to lag behind males, demonstrating continued bias within the discipline.Item type:Publication, Visualization of gender, race, citizenship and academic performance in association with career outcomes of 15-year biomedical doctoral alumni at a public research university Open PDF(2018) ;Mathur, Ambika ;Cano, Annmarie ;Kohl, Michael ;Muthunayake, Nisansala S.Vaidyanathan, PrassannaIt has long been thought that biomedical doctoral students pursue careers primarily as tenure-track/tenured faculty at research institutions. Recent reports showed, however, that the majority of biomedical doctoral alumni engage in a variety of careers. Wayne State University (WSU) undertook a project to understand the career trajectories of its biomedical doctoral alumni to create programs to better prepare its students for careers in multiple pathways. Data were collected on career outcomes of WSU's biomedical doctoral alumni who graduated in a 15-year period from 1999-2014. Careers were classified into three tiers by Employment Sector, Career Types and Job Functions and career paths were examined by alumni gender, race, U.S. citizenship status, and association with certain academic characteristics. Several statistically significant differences in career paths among all demographics were found. For example, women were more likely to be in teaching and providing healthcare, men in faculty and research; Black alumni pursued careers in Government at higher rates and Whites in For-Profit careers; Asians and non-U.S. citizens spent more time in training positions than others. There was no association of academic characteristics such as GRE, GPA, and Time-to-Degree completion with careers in the two largest sectors of Academia or For-profit. Since our trainees are engaged in this rich variety of careers essential to advancing biomedical science and research nationally, it is imperative for the graduate training community to embrace all careers as successful, and transform the model for biomedical doctoral training to foster student success across this broad career spectrum.Item type:Publication, Author-level data confirm the widening gender gap in publishing rates during COVID-19 Open PDF(2022) ;Madsen, Emil Bargmann ;Nielsen, Mathias Wullum ;Bjørnholm, Josefine ;Jagsi, ReshmaAndersen, Jens PeterPublications are essential for a successful academic career, and there is evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has amplified existing gender disparities in the publishing process. We used longitudinal publication data on 431,207 authors in four disciplines - basic medicine, biology, chemistry and clinical medicine - to quantify the differential impact of COVID-19 on the annual publishing rates of men and women. In a difference-in-differences analysis, we estimated that the average gender difference in publication productivity increased from -0.26 in 2019 to -0.35 in 2020; this corresponds to the output of women being 17% lower than the output of men in 2109, and 24% lower in 2020. An age-group comparison showed a widening gender gap for both early-career and mid-career scientists. The increasing gender gap was most pronounced among highly productive authors and in biology and clinical medicine. Our study demonstrates the importance of reinforcing institutional commitments to diversity through policies that support the inclusion and retention of women in research.Item type:Publication, Who acknowledges who? A gender analysis(2019) ;Paul-Hus, A. ;Mongeon, P. ;Sainte-Marie, M.Larivière, V.Acknowledgements found in scholarly papers allow for credit attribution among non-authors—from individuals to organizations—that contributed to a piece of research. As such, they are associated with a different kind of recognition than authorship. While several studies have shown that social factors affect authorship and citation practices, few analyses have been performed on acknowledgements. Based on 878,250 acknowledgees mentioned in 291,167 papers published in 2015 retrieved from Web of Science, the objective of this work-in-progress is to better understand such credit attribution practices and how gender may influence them. Our results show that gender disparities generally found in authorship can be extended to acknowledgements, and that women are even more underrepresented in the acknowledgement than in the authors’ list of a paper. Our findings also confirm that women acknowledge proportionally more women. These results suggest that gender plays a role in the entire spectrum of credit attribution practices, from authorships to acknowledgements.Item type:Publication, Analysis of science journalism reveals gender and regional disparities in coverage Open PDF(2024) ;Davidson, Natalie R.Greene, Casey S.Science journalism is a critical way for the public to learn about and benefit from scientific findings. Such journalism shapes the public's view of the current state of science and legitimizes experts. Journalists can only cite and quote a limited number of sources, who they may discover in their research, including recommendations by other scientists. Biases in either process may influence who is identified and ultimately included as a source. To examine potential biases in science journalism, we analyzed 22,001 non-research articles published by Nature and compared these with Nature-published research articles with respect to predicted gender and name origin. We extracted cited authors' names and those of quoted speakers. While citations and quotations within a piece do not reflect the entire information-gathering process, they can provide insight into the demographics of visible sources. We then predicted gender and name origin of the cited authors and speakers. We compared articles with a comparator set made up of first and last authors within primary research articles in Nature and a subset of Springer Nature articles in the same time period. In our analysis, we found a skew toward quoting men in Nature science journalism. However, quotation is trending toward equal representation at a faster rate than authorship rates in academic publishing. Gender disparity in Nature quotes was dependent on the article type. We found a significant over-representation of names with predicted Celtic/English origin and under-representation of names with a predicted East Asian origin in both in extracted quotes and journal citations but dampened in citations.