PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.PsychologySubject: search.filters.subject.Scientific Productivity

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • 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,
    Is there a gender difference in scientific collaboration? A scientometric examination of co-authorships among industrial–organizational psychologists Open PDF 
    (2016)
    Fell, C.B.
    ;
    König, C.J.
    In modern knowledge societies, scientific research is crucial, but expensive and often publicly financed. However, with regard to scientific research success, some studies have found gender differences in favor of men. To explain this, it has been argued that female researchers collaborate less than male researchers, and the current study examines this argument scientometrically. A secondary data analysis was applied to the sample of a recent scientometric publication (König et al. in Scientometrics 105:1931–1952, 2015. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1646-y). The sample comprised 4234 (45 % female) industrial–organizational psychologists with their 46,656 publications (published from 1948 to 2013) and all of their approx. 100,000 algorithmically genderized collaborators (i.e., co-authors). Findings confirmed that (a) the majority of researchers’ publications resulted from collaborations, and (b) their engagement in collaborations was related to their scientific success, although not as clearly as expected (and partly even negatively). However, there was no evidence that a lack of female collaboration causes females’ lower scientific success. In fact, female researchers engage in more scientific collaborations. Our findings have important implications for science and society because they make gender differences in scientific success much harder to rationalize. © 2016, 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 Hun
    ;
    Joo, Harry
    We 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).