PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 42

Unpacking mathematical gender stereotypes: trends and directions from 25 years of research Open PDF
(Frontiers Media SA, 2025-11-18)
Nurlu, Özge
Gender norms shape multiple domains, including mathematics-long framed as a male-dominated field-thereby fostering pervasive mathematical gender stereotypes (MGS) that affect individuals' participation and achievement. This study aims to systematically synthesize empirical research published between 1999 and 2024, indexed in Web of Science, written in English, and available in full text. Only articles explicitly examining MGS were included; studies focused on broader STEM stereotypes, non-English publications, records without full-text access, and papers outside the specified time window were excluded. Limitations include the absence of protocol pre-registration-although inclusion/exclusion criteria and the analysis plan were specified in writing prior to the search and PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed-and the unavoidable subjectivity in interpretation and categorization despite established inter-coder reliability. Analyses indicate that most studies are situated in psychology, frequently employ experimental designs, and primarily sample university students. Surveys dominate data collection, and parametric inferential statistics are commonly used. Geographically, the literature is concentrated in Western countries-particularly the United States and Germany-with limited contributions from the Global South. Publication counts fluctuate over time, with notable peaks in 2012 and 2022. Conceptually, the literature converges on two principal axes: (i) belief/domain-ownership formulations centered on male superiority and (ii) process-based formulations centered on ST. Less frequently examined yet theoretically informative extensions include endorsement, internalization, counter-stereotypic role models, and stereotype lift. Across qualitative, descriptive, correlational, mediation, meta-analytic, and experimental evidence, findings consistently cluster around these axes, with stereotype endorsement and MGS occupying central positions. Taken together, the results underscore the need for future research that is more interdisciplinary, cross-cultural, and methodologically diverse to more comprehensively address MGS.
A Protocol to Assess Contextual Factors During Program Impact Evaluation: A Case Study of a STEM Gender Equity Intervention in Higher Education Open PDF
(2023)
Nobrega, S
;
Edwards, K
;
El Ghaziri, M
;
Giacobbe, L
;
Rice, S
Program evaluations that lack experimental design often fail to produce evidence of impact because there is no available control group. Theory-based evaluations can generate evidence of a program's causal effects if evaluators collect evidence along the theorized causal chain and identify possible competing causes. However, few methods are available for assessing competing causes in the program environment. Effect Modifier Assessment (EMA) is a method previously used in smaller-scale studies to assess possible competing causes of observed changes following an intervention. In our case study of a university gender equity intervention, EMA generated useful evidence of competing causes to augment program evaluation. Top-down administrative culture, poor experiences with hiring and promotion, and workload were identified as impeding forces that might have reduced program benefits. The EMA addresses a methodological gap in theory-based evaluation and might be useful in a variety of program settings.
Evaluating the research performance of women scientists in Indian research laboratories based on Scopus citation database: A bibliometric analysis
(2022)
Mukherjee, B.
This study examines the contributions of women scientists currently working in various research organizations under the Ministry of Science and Technology, India. Women scientists were identified through the official websites of the research laboratories and their publication performance has been tracked using the Scopus database. There are 901 women scientists working in 78 research organizations under the Ministry and have published 21810 publications up to December 2019, almost 65 percent of which has been appeared during 2010 to 2019. The publication per scientist has risen from 6.85 article per year before 2000 to 10.45 paper in 2015-2019 which indicates increasing participation of women in science from India. Women scientists are primarily engaged in biological sciencesresearch, however fields such as materials sciences, nano-technology, and astrophysics are also becoming the preferred subject choices among women. Women scientists mostly published their articles as a member of a team of utmost 10 authors, however, their position in multi-authored articles is mostly as co-authors than that of principal authors. Women in the age group ofbetween31 to 40 produced maximum publications, and almost 98 percent of publications appeared in collaboration with other scientists.This study confirms that publication productivity does not decline with age. There are women scientists who stay active in research and keep their productivity at a high level until their retirement. The study suggests that the increasing participation of women in Indian science is encouraging, as such more funding opportunities to younger women researchers may be important to give them more lead time to build a strong career. © 2022
A “scientific diversity” intervention to reduce gender bias in a sample of life scientists Open PDF
(American Society for Cell Biology, 2016)
Moss-Racusin, C.A.
;
van der Toorn, J.
;
Dovidio, J.F.
;
Brescoll, V.L.
;
Graham, M.J.
Mounting experimental evidence suggests that subtle gender biases favoring men contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), including many subfields of the life sciences. However, there are relatively few evaluations of diversity interventions designed to reduce gender biases within the STEM community. Because gender biases distort the meritocratic evaluation and advancement of students, interventions targeting instructors’ biases are particularly needed. We evaluated one such intervention, a workshop called “Scientific Diversity” that was consistent with an established framework guiding the development of diversity interventions designed to reduce biases and was administered to a sample of life science instructors (N=126) at several sessions of the National Academies Summer Institute for Undergraduate Education held nationwide. Evidence emerged indicating the efficacy of the “Scientific Diversity” work-shop, such that participants were more aware of gender bias, expressed less gender bias, and were more willing to engage in actions to reduce gender bias 2 weeks after participating in the intervention compared with 2 weeks before the intervention. Implications for diversity interventions aimed at reducing gender bias and broadening the participation of women in the life sciences are discussed. © 2016 C. A. Moss-Racusin et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education.
Authorship in top-ranked mathematical and physical journals: Role of gender on self-perceptions and bibliographic evidence Open PDF
(2020)
Mihaljević, H.
;
Santamaría, L.
Despite increasing rates of women researching in math-intensive fields, publications by female authors remain underrepresented. By analyzing millions of records from the dedicated bibliographic databases zbMATH, arXiv, and ADS, we unveil the chronological evolution of authorships by women in mathematics, physics, and astronomy. We observe a pronounced shortage of female authors in top-ranked journals, with quasistagnant figures in various distinguished periodicals in the first two disciplines and a significantly more equitable situation in the latter. Additionally, we provide an interactive open-access web interface to further examine the data. To address whether female scholars submit fewer articles for publication to relevant journals or whether they are consciously or unconsciously disadvantaged by the peer review system, we also study authors’ perceptions of their submission practices and analyze around 10,000 responses, collected as part of a recent global survey of scientists. Our analysis indicates that men and women perceive their submission practices to be similar, with no evidence that a significantly lower number of submissions by women is responsible for their underrepresentation in top-ranked journals. According to the self-reported responses, a larger number of articles submitted to prestigious venues correlates rather with aspects associated with pronounced research activity, a well-established network, and academic seniority. © 2020 Helena Mihaljević and Lucía Santamaría.
Women involvement in editorial boards of mathematics journals
(2007)
Mauleón, E.
;
Bordons, M.
Members of editorial boards of journals play an essential role in science, since they contribute to guarantee the quality and relevance of publications. This study analyses whether women are well represented in editorial boards as a sign of her participation in responsibility positions in science. Women's representation on the editorial board of eight international high quality mathematics journals is studied and compared to women's presence as authors of papers in the same journals. On average only 4% of the members of the editorial boards analysed were women, while 10% of the authors with publications were female scientists. Inter-gender differences in impact of publications were not found, but less collaboration was observed in female publications. This study shows that women are under-represented as authors in Mathematics journals but her presence is even lower in leadership positions such as members of journal editorial boards.
A phenomenological study of factors influencing the gender gap in physics and other STEM-related fields
(American Society for Engineering Education, 2014)
Larkin, T.L.
;
Vogel, T.
Current reports on the gender gap in STEM suggest factors influencing career choice between the sexes are not inevitable. Recent decades have documented a clear change in the gender makeup of some STEM disciplines. However, in many areas, the gap has persisted with little or no change in the number of women choosing to pursue a career in a STEM-related field such as Physics. According to recent AIP reports1, 2, women comprise 21% of undergraduate, 21% of graduate, and 19% of doctoral degrees in Physics. Many factors have been studied by scholars as contributing to the dearth of women in Physics and STEM3-8. Factors including the lack of role models, discouragement from the media, sex difference in cognitive skill, and unpleasant experiences related to gender-bias in the classroom have all been suggested as potential reasons why women tend not to pursue a career in Physics or other STEM field. Suggestions from some scholars also indicate that women often tend to seek out careers in which they feel they can make a difference. Unfortunately, the size of the gap in many areas has reached a plateau that hasn't appeared to shift significantly over time. This phenomenological study will look at how individual perceptions of STEM (with an emphasis on Physics) as a career option may influence academic and professional pursuits. To that end, formal interviews with practicing professionals and college students from a range of disciplines will be used as a primary data collection tool. This paper will provide a synthesis of the empirical data collected through these formal interviews. Factors that emerge from this synthesis as having a significant influence on one's perception of STEM as a career choice will be further examined and discussed. By focusing on individual perceptions, this study aims to contribute to the existing empirical database of factors that influence career choice and perpetuate the gender gap in STEMrelated fields such as Physics. The themes that emerge may stimulate further research on this topic and provide suggestions for best practices that may contribute to closing the gap. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2014.
Gender gaps in Australian research publishing, citation and co-authorship Open PDF
(2023)
Jamali, Hamid R.
;
Abbasi, Alireza
Despite improvement in gender inequality in Australian science, the problem has not been fully addressed yet. To better understand the nature of gender inequality in Australian science, all gendered Australian first authored articles published between 2010 and 2020 and indexed in the Dimensions database were analysed. Field of Research (FoR) was used as the subject classification of articles and Field Citation Ratio (FCR) was used for citation comparison. Overall, the ratio of female to male first authored articles increased over the years, and this was true for all FoRs except for information and computing sciences. The ratio of single-authored articles by females was also improved over the study period. Females appeared to have a citation advantage, using Field Citation Ratio, over males in a few FoRs including mathematical sciences, chemical sciences, technology, built environment and design, studies in human society, law and legal studies, and studies in creative arts and writing. The average FCR for female first authored articles was greater than the average FCR for male first authored articles, including in a few fields such mathematical sciences where male authors outperformed females in terms of the number of articles.
The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented? Open PDF
(2018)
Holman, Luke
;
Stuart-Fox, Devi
;
Hauser, Cindy E.
Women comprise a minority of the Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine (STEMM) workforce. Quantifying the gender gap may identify fields that will not reach parity without intervention, reveal underappreciated biases, and inform benchmarks for gender balance among conference speakers, editors, and hiring committees. Using the PubMed and arXiv databases, we estimated the gender of 36 million authors from >100 countries publishing in >6000 journals, covering most STEMM disciplines over the last 15 years, and made a web app allowing easy access to the data (https://lukeholman.github.io/genderGap/). Despite recent progress, the gender gap appears likely to persist for generations, particularly in surgery, computer science, physics, and maths. The gap is especially large in authorship positions associated with seniority, and prestigious journals have fewer women authors. Additionally, we estimate that men are invited by journals to submit papers at approximately double the rate of women. Wealthy countries, notably Japan, Germany, and Switzerland, had fewer women authors than poorer ones. We conclude that the STEMM gender gap will not close without further reforms in education, mentoring, and academic publishing.
Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder Open PDF
(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2015)
Handley, Ian M.
;
Brown, Elizabeth R.
;
Moss-Racusin, Corinne A.
;
Smith, Jessi L.
Scientists are trained to evaluate and interpret evidence without bias or subjectivity. Thus, growing evidence revealing a gender bias against women—or favoring men—within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) settings is provocative and raises questions about the extent to which gender bias may contribute to women’s underrepresentation within STEM fields. To the extent that research illustrating gender bias in STEM is viewed as convincing, the culture of science can begin to address the bias. However, are men and women equally receptive to this type of experimental evidence? This question was tested with three randomized, double-blind experiments—two involving samples from the general public (n = 205 and 303, respectively) and one involving a sample of university STEM and non-STEM faculty (n = 205). In all experiments, participants read an actual journal abstract reporting gender bias in a STEM context (or an altered abstract reporting no gender bias in experiment 3) and evaluated the overall quality of the research. Results across experiments showed that men evaluate the gender-bias research less favorably than women, and, of concern, this gender difference was especially prominent among STEM faculty (experiment 2). These results suggest a relative reluctance among men, especially faculty men within STEM, to accept evidence of gender biases in STEM. This finding is problematic because broadening the participation of underrepresented people in STEM, including women, necessarily requires a widespread willingness (particularly by those in the majority) to acknowledge that bias exists before transformation is possible.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results