PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
6 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Women in Science. Experiences of Academics in Switzerland(Transcript, 2025-08-12) ;De Cia Annalisa ;Hellmüller, SaraMesok Khan, ElizabethWomen in science face particular challenges, such as structural inequalities, highly competitive work environments, and at times toxic cultures. This collection conveys the experiences of women academics in Switzerland, featuring insights from twelve scholars across various universities and disciplines. Each contributor shares their unique journey in pursuit of a professorship, illustrating the rich diversity of the Swiss scientific community. This volume offers hope for those struggling with finding their place in science, emphasizing the joys and privileges that can be found in an academic career and the passion and perseverance of those pursuing it.Item type:Publication, How does research productivity relate to gender? Analyzing gender differences for multiple publication dimensions Open PDF(2018) ;Mayer, S.J.Rathmann, J.M.K.Measures of research productivity have become widely used for obtaining tenure, third-party funding, and additional resources from universities. However, previous studies indicate that men might have a higher research output than women, with mixed conclusions about the factors that drive these differences. This study explores to what extent the research productivity of psychology professors in Germany is related to gender and, furthermore, how any gender gaps can be explained by controlling for individual and organizational factors. In addition, three publication dimensions (publications in top 10% journals, journal articles, and book and collection chapters) are distinguished to determine the effect of gender on research productivity as precisely as possible. A unique data set based on all full professors in psychology in Germany and their publication record in 2013 and 2014 is used (Nauthors = 294; Narticles = 2252, Nchapters = 439). Thus, this study provides a current overview of the state of research productivity in an entire discipline after researchers receive tenure and external restrictions are lessened. Our research helps to further locate the point at which gender differences in publication numbers occur. As we are the first to systematically to analyze different publication types, we are able to show that there is no difference in publication numbers for less-prestigious book chapters. However, we find significant gender differences for research productivity in academic journals that are more important for career advancement and peer recognition, even after we control for the most important individual and organizational factors that might explain gender differences. Our results point to the direction that women do research and write manuscripts, but may have different publication patterns: instead of submitting to competitive journals, they may be satisfied with less-prestigious book chapters. As publications in peer-reviewed journals are especially important for career advancement as well as peer recognition, this publication pattern may be disadvantageous for women. Overall, we conclude that additional research to understand these developments is needed that focuses on the motives and beliefs of researchers, both to improve gender equality in academia and to give women better chances to gain recognition and prestige. © 2018, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.Item type:Publication, Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology? Open PDF(2015) ;König, C.J. ;Fell, C.B. ;Kellnhofer, L.Schui, G.Questions about gender differences in the workplace usually attract much attention—but often generate more heat than light. To examine gender differences in several facets of scientific productivity and impact, a quantitative, scientometric approach is employed. Analyzing a sample of industrial and organizational psychologists (Nauthors = 4234; Npublications = 46,656), this study raises both questions and concerns about gender differences in research, by showing that female and male I–O psychologists differ with regard to publication output (fewer publications authored by female researchers), impact (heterogeneous, indicator-dependent gender differences), their publication career courses (male researchers’ periods of active publishing last longer and show longer interruptions), and research interests (only marginal gender differences). In order to get a glimpse of future developments, we repeated all analyses with the student subsample and found nearly no gender differences, suggesting a more gender-balanced future. Thus, this study gives an overview over the status quo of gender differences in an entire psychological sub-discipline. Future research will have to examine whether these gender differences are volitional in nature or the manifestation of external constraints. © 2015, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.Item type:Publication, Contemporary psychology and women: A gender analysis of the scientific production Open PDF(2019) ;González-Álvarez, J.Cervera-Crespo, T.Despite important advances made in recent decades, women are still underrepresented in science (less than 30% of authorships). This study presents a bibliometric analysis of all the Psychology articles published in 2009 included in the Web of Science database (Thomson Reuters) in order to examine the contribution of women in contemporary Psychology, their pattern of research collaboration, the scientific content and the scientific impact from a gender perspective. From a total of 90,067 authorships, gender could be identified in 74,413 (82.6%) of them, being 40,782 (54.8%) male authorships and 33,631 (45.2%) female authorships. These data corresponded to 24,477 (49.9%) individual men and 24,553 (50.1%) women, respectively. Therefore, Psychology presents gender parity in the number of authors, and a gender asymmetry in the number of authorships that it is much lower than in science in general and other specific scientific fields. In relative terms, women tend to be concentrated in the first position of the authorship by-line and much less in the last (senior) position. This double pattern suggests that age probably plays a role in (partly) explaining the slight gender disparity of authorships. © 2017 International Union of Psychological ScienceItem type:Publication, Scientific production in psychology: A gender analysis Open PDF(2013) ;Barrios, M. ;Villarroya, A.Borrego, Á.This study aims to identify possible gender inequalities in the scholarly output of researchers in the field of psychology in Spain. A sample of 522 papers and reviews published in 2007 was extracted from the Thomson ISI Web of Science. The presence of women, the collaboration pattern and the impact of these scientific publications were analyzed. The results show that the average number of female researchers per paper was 0. 42 (SD 0. 33) and that 42. 3 % of the papers had a female researcher as the first author. Moreover, the proportion of female authors of a paper was statistically significantly higher when the first author was female. Studies carried out in cooperation with other Spanish or international institutions had fewer female authors than studies conducted at a single center. The impact of the papers, measured by the journal impact factor and the number of citations, was independent of the authors' gender or the proportion of female authors. In summary, the study highlights a gender imbalance in Spanish scientific output in Psychology, and a higher proportion of male researchers in international networks. © 2012 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.Item type:Publication, Gender productivity gap among star performers in STEM and other scientific fields. Open PDF(2018) ;Aguinis, Herman ;Ji, Young HunJoo, HarryWe examined the gender productivity gap in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and other scientific fields (i.e., applied psychology, mathematical psychology), specifically among star performers. Study 1 included 3,853 researchers who published 3,161 articles in mathematics. Study 2 included 45,007 researchers who published 7,746 articles in genetics. Study 3 included 4,081 researchers who published 2,807 articles in applied psychology and 6,337 researchers who published 3,796 articles in mathematical psychology. Results showed that (a) the power law with exponential cutoff is the best-fitting distribution of research productivity across fields and gender groups and (b) there is a considerable gender productivity gap among stars in favor of men across fields. Specifically, the underrepresentation of women is more extreme as we consider more elite ranges of performance (i.e., top 10%, 5%, and 1% of performers). Conceptually, results suggest that individuals vary in research productivity predominantly because of the generative mechanism of incremental differentiation, which is the mechanism that produces power laws with exponential cutoffs. Also, results suggest that incremental differentiation occurs to a greater degree among men and certain forms of discrimination may disproportionately constrain women's output increments. Practically, results suggest that women may have to accumulate more scientific knowledge, resources, and social capital to achieve the same level of increase in total outputs as their male counterparts. Finally, we offer recommendations on interventions aimed at reducing constraints for incremental differentiation among women that could be useful for narrowing the gender productivity gap specifically among star performers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).