PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.HumanitiesSubject: search.filters.subject.Social Sciences

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Open access publishing probabilities based on gender and authorship structures in vietnam Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Nguyen, H.T.T.
    ;
    Nguyen, M.-H.
    ;
    Le, T.-T.
    ;
    Ho, M.-T.
    ;
    Vuong, Q.-H.
    Open access (OA) publishing is beneficial for researchers to improve recognition, representation, and visibility in academia. However, few studies have been conducted for studying the association between gender and OA publishing likelihood. Therefore, the current study explores the impacts of gender-based authorship structures on OA publishing in Vietnamese social sciences and humanities. Bayesian analysis was performed on a dataset of 3122 publications in social sciences and humanities. We found that publications with mixed-gender authorship were most likely to be published under Gold Access terms (26.31–31.65%). In contrast, the likelihood of publications with the solely male or female author(s) was lower. It is also notable that if female researcher(s) held the first-author position in an article of mixed-gender authorship, the publication would be less likely to be published under Gold Access terms (26.31% compared to 31.65% of male-first-author structure). In addition, publications written by a solo female author (14.19%) or a group of female authors (10.72%) had lower OA publishing probabilities than those written by a solely male author(s) (17.14%). These findings hint at the possible advantage of gender diversity and the disadvantage of gender homophily (especially female-only authorship) on OA publishing likelihood. Moreover, they show there might be some negative impacts of gender inequality on OA publishing. As a result, the notion of gender diversity, financial and policy supports are recommended to promote the open science movement. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Ladies First? Not So Fast: Linguistic Sexism in Peer-Reviewed Research. Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Willis, Malachi
    ;
    Jozkowski, Kristen N.
    The words we use reflect and influence our interpretation of the world. The role of gender within a language varies; biases based on social gender are referred to as linguistic sexism. Male firstness is the practice of persistently ordering masculine terms before feminine terms. Because academic writing is mandated to be free of bias, peer-reviewed research should not contain any form of linguistic sexism. To assess the presence of male firstness in academic writing, we examined 862 contemporary articles from 10 social science journals across three disciplines: sexuality, health, and psychology. To assess male firstness, we tallied common gendered pairs (e.g., "women and men"; "male and female") and calculated percentages indicating how often men were presented before women. We found that male firstness bias was present in each of the 10 journals. For individual journals, the percentage of gendered phrases that presented masculine terms first ranged from 57.7% to 88.8%. Sexuality and health journals demonstrated less linguistic sexism than psychology; however, there were no consistent trends between journals within each discipline. We discuss the current presence of male firstness in academic journals and the issues this bias triggers. Recommendations for reducing linguistic sexism in peer-reviewed research are also discussed.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Bibliometric analysis of the situation of female researchers in the fields of social sciences and law in Spain Open PDF 
    (2011)
    Torres-Salinas, D.
    ;
    Muñoz-Muñoz, A.M.
    ;
    Jiménez-Contreras, E.
    This paper presents a bibliometric study analyzing the productivity and citations of female researchers in the fields of social sciences and law in Spain, within the context of Spanish scientific journals. The study was based on the rankings of researchers included in the Índice de Impacto de las Revistas Españolas de Ciencias Sociales (INRECS) and Índice de Impacto de las Revistas Españolas de Ciencias Jurídicas (INRECJ). Eleven different scientific disciplines were analyzed and the final sample consisted of 3,370 researchers, of whom 30 % were women. To study gender differences four variables were selected and analyzed: number of papers, number of citations, number of international citations and citation average. The results show that women in the 11 areas studied have both a lower productivity and a lower number of citations. On the other hand, in some areas women do receive a greater number of international citations and in almost all areas achieve higher citation averages. However the presence of women in the rankings and among the Spanish research elite is still small.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Do women ask the same questions as men in social sciences? Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Palacios-Núñez, G.
    ;
    Botero Arcila, J.D.
    Previous studies about the philosophy of science from a feminist perspective have observed that the historical exclusion of women from academic spaces caused sexist and androcentric biases in science. Therefore, feminist epistemologies have pointed out the need to build a new epistemology, which integrates women's ways of knowing. This work presents an exploratory analysis based on semantic networks by gender to supply empirical evidence in this matter and figure out if women have contributed to social sciences posing different questions than men. For this aim, we retrieved from the Scopus database all the publications of Mexico in social sciences. The differences and similarities in meaning by gender were examined through the structural measures of each semantic network. This work studied the researchers who were active from 2007 to 2018 in the National System of Researchers of Mexico. The results revealed that women indeed asked different questions than men. © 2022 Elsevier Ltd
  • Item type:Publication,
    On the relationship between supervisor–supervisee gender difference and scientific impact of doctoral dissertations: Evidence from Humanities and Social Sciences in China Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Bu, Y.
    ;
    Li, H.
    ;
    Wei, C.
    ;
    Liu, M.
    ;
    Li, J.
    This article explores the relationships between supervisor–supervisee gender difference and the scientific impact of doctoral dissertations. We use the China Doctoral Dissertations Full-text Database and pay special attention to the fields of Humanities and Social Sciences in China in our empirical study. By establishing regression models, we find that the ranks of the scientific impact regarding doctoral dissertations are female–female (first), female–male (second), male–male (third) and male–female (fourth) pairs (sequence: student gender and then supervisor gender). The finding has many interesting implications for science policy and gender inequality. © The Author(s) 2020.