PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Filters

2018 - 201942020 - 20227

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.Economics & BusinessGeographical Area: search.filters.geographical.USA

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11
  • Item type:Publication,
    Publishing and Promotion in Economics: The Tyranny of the Top Five Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Heckman, James J.
    ;
    Moktan, Sidharth
    This paper examines the relationship between placement of publications in top five (T5) journals and receipt of tenure in academic economics departments. Analyzing the job histories of tenure-track economists hired by the top 35 US economics departments, we find that T5 publications have a powerful influence on tenure decisions and rates of transition to tenure. A survey of the perceptions of young economists supports the formal statistical analysis. Pursuit of T5 publications has become the obsession of the next generation of economists. However, the T5 screen is far from reliable. A substantial share of influential publications appear in non-T5 outlets. Reliance on the T5 to screen talent incentivizes careerism over creativity.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Do females create higher impact research? Scopus citations and Mendeley readers for articles from five countries Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Thelwall, M.
    There are known gender imbalances in participation in scientific fields, from female dominance of nursing to male dominance of mathematics. It is not clear whether there is also a citation imbalance, with some claiming that male-authored research tends to be more cited. No previous study has assessed gender differences in the readers of academic research on a large scale, however. In response, this article assesses whether there are gender differences in the average citations and/or Mendeley readers of academic publications. Field normalised logged Scopus citations and Mendeley readers from mid-2018 for articles published in 2014 were investigated for articles with first authors from India, Spain, Turkey, the UK and the USA in up to 251 fields with at least 50 male and female authors. Although female-authored research is less cited in Turkey (-4.0%) and India (-3.6%), it is marginally more cited in Spain (0.4%), the UK (0.4%), and the USA (0.2%). Female-authored research has fewer Mendeley readers in India (-1.1%) but more in Spain (1.4%), Turkey (1.1%), the UK (2.7%) and the USA (3.0%). Thus, whilst there may be little practical gender difference in citation impact in countries with mature science systems, the higher female readership impact suggests a wider audience for female-authored research. The results also show that the conclusions from a gender analysis depend on the field normalisation method. A theoretically informed decision must therefore be made about which normalisation to use. The results also suggest that arithmetic mean-based field normalisation is favourable to males. © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences in citation impact for 27 fields and six english-speaking countries 1996–2014 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Thelwall, M.
    Initiatives addressing the lack of women in many academic fields, and the general lack of senior women, need to be informed about the causes of any gender differences that may affect career progression, including citation impact. Previous research about gender differences in journal article citation impact has found the direction of any difference to vary by country and field, but has usually avoided discussions of the magnitude and wider significance of any differences and has not been systematic in terms of fields and/or time. This study investigates differences in citation impact between male and female first-authored research for 27 broad fields and six large English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the USA) from 1996 to 2014. The results show an overall female first author citation advantage, although in most broad fields it is reversed in all countries for some years. International differences include Medicine having a female first author citation advantage for all years in Australia, but a male citation advantage for most years in Canada. There was no general trend for the gender difference to increase or decrease over time. The average effect size is small, however, and unlikely to have a substantial influence on overall gender differences in researcher careers. © 2020 Mike Thelwall. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Can Mentoring Help Female Assistant Professors in Economics? An Evaluation by Randomized Trial Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Ginther, Donna K.
    ;
    Currie, Janet M.
    ;
    Blau, Francine D.
    ;
    Croson, Rachel T. A.
    Women continue to be underrepresented in academic ranks in the economics profession. The Committee on the Status of Women in the Economics Profession of the American Economic Association established the CeMENT mentoring workshop to support women in research careers. The program was designed as a randomized controlled trial. This study evaluates differences between the treatment and control groups in career outcomes. Results indicate that relative to women in the control group, treated women are more likely to stay in academia and more likely to have received tenure in an institution ranked in the top 30 or 50 in economics in the world.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women in Academic Economics: Have We Made Progress?
    (National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, 2021)
    Ginther, Donna
    ;
    Kahn, Shulamit
    This study uses data from Academic Analytics to examine gender differences in promotion to associate professor in economics. We found that women in economics were 15% less likely to be promoted to associate professor after controlling for cumulative publications, citations, grants and grant dollars. In contrast, we found no significant gender differences in promotion in other fields including biomedical science, physical science, political science, mathematics and statistics, and engineering. We separated the sample by the research intensity of institutions and found suggestive evidence that these results were being driven by less research-intensive institutions.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Predicting early career productivity of PhD economists: Does advisor-match matter? Open PDF 
    (2020)
    García-Suaza, Andrés
    ;
    Otero, Jesús
    ;
    Winkelmann, Rainer
    We assess the role played by department rank and advisor-match on the early stage productivity of recent PhDs in economics using a tailor-made data set based on RePEc. After allowing for the potential influence of other factors, including gender and field of specialisation, we find as expected that both advisory quality and rank of the graduation institution are positively related to the academic productivity of graduates. However, in top institutions, students working with the most productive academics do not outperform others unless they co-author with their advisor. For students in non-top institutions, being advised by the best academics is always associated with a higher research output. Possible explanations for this difference are pointed out, including selection and differences in advising styles.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Gaps at the Academies Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Card, David
    ;
    DellaVigna, Stefano
    ;
    Funk, Patricia
    ;
    Iriberri, Nagore
    Historically, a large majority of the newly elected members of the National Academy of Science (NAS) and the American Academy of Arts and Science (AAAS) were men. Within the past two decades, however, that situation has changed, and in the last 3 years women made up about 40 percent of the new members in both academies. We build lists of active scholars from publications in the top journals in three fields – Psychology, Mathematics and Economics – and develop a series of models to compare changes in the probability of selection of women as members of the NAS and AAAS from the 1960s to today, controlling for publications and citations. In the early years of our sample, women were less likely to be selected as members than men with similar records. By the 1990s, the selection process at both academies was approximately gender-neutral, conditional on publications and citations. In the past 20 years, however, a positive preference for female members has emerged and strengthened in all three fields. Currently, women are 3-15 times more likely to be selected as members of the AAAS and NAS than men with similar publication and citation records.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences in Peer Recognition by Economists Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Card, David
    ;
    DellaVigna, Stefano
    We study the evolving gender gap in peer recognition in Economics. We begin by analyzing the selection of Fellows of the Econometric Society, one of the oldest and most prestigious international societies in the field. Using publicly available information on Fellows elected each year from 1933 onward, merged with a new data set of over 40,000 “actively publishing” economists, we estimate the effect of gender on selection as a fellow over the past seven decades. Our baseline models include controls for cumulative publications in each of the top 5 journals, citations to these papers, and publications in a broad set of general interest and field journals. We then propose to use confidential data obtained from the Econometric Society on nominations and vote shares in the last 13 years (2006-2019) to decompose the gender gap in selection as a fellow into components attributable to differences in the probability of being nominated and in the probability of being successfully elected if nominated. We provide a broader perspective on our findings for the Econometric Society by conducting a parallel analysis of gender gaps in selection as a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences, and the American Economic Association, as well as being awarded a Sloan Foundation Fellowship. We conclude by analyzing several of the channels that may mediate the gender gap in peer recognition, including visibility, networking, and credit for coauthored work.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Fixing the Leaky Pipeline: Strategies for Making Economics Work for Women at Every Stage Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Buckles, Kasey
    While women comprise over half of all undergraduate students in the United States, they account for less than one-third of economics majors. From there, the proportion of women at each stage of the academic tenure track continues to decrease, creating a "leaky pipeline." In this paper, I provide a toolkit of interventions that could be implemented by individuals, organizations, or academic units who are working to attract and retain women students and faculty at each stage of this pipeline. I focus on smaller-scale, targeted interventions that have been evaluated in a way that allows for the credible estimation of causal effects.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Young “Stars” in Economics: What They Do and Where They Go Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Bryan, Kevin A.
    We construct a data set of job flyouts for junior economists between 2013 and 2018 to investigate three aspects of the market for “stars.” First, what is the background of students who become stars? Second, what type of research does the top of the market demand? Third, where do these students take jobs? Among other results, we show that stars are more likely to be international and male than PhDs overall, that theoretical and semi-theoretical approaches remain dominant, that American programs both produce the most stars and hire even more, that almost none are hired by the private sector, and that there is a strong shift toward having pre-PhD full-time academic research jobs. (JEL A11, A12, A23, J24)