PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Filters

2018 - 201922020 - 20224

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.SociologyGeographical Area: search.filters.geographical.USA

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Item type:Publication,
    Intersectional inequalities in science Open PDF 
    (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2022)
    Kozlowski, Diego
    ;
    Larivière, Vincent
    ;
    Sugimoto, Cassidy R.
    ;
    Monroe-White, Thema
    The US scientific workforce is primarily composed of White men. Studies have demonstrated the systemic barriers preventing women and other minoritized populations from gaining entry to science; few, however, have taken an intersectional perspective and examined the consequences of these inequalities on scientific knowledge. We provide a large-scale bibliometric analysis of the relationship between intersectional identities, topics, and scientific impact. We find homophily between identities and topic, suggesting a relationship between diversity in the scientific workforce and expansion of the knowledge base. However, topic selection comes at a cost to minoritized individuals for whom we observe both between- and within-topic citation disadvantages. To enhance the robustness of science, research organizations should provide adequate resources to historically underfunded research areas while simultaneously providing access for minoritized individuals into high-prestige networks and topics.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Does a gender-neutral name associate with the research impact of a scientist? Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Zhang, N.
    ;
    He, G.
    ;
    Shi, D.
    ;
    Zhao, Z.
    ;
    Li, J.
    Women have long suffered in both academia and industry from lower status, underrepresentation, unequal treatment, and other challenges based on gender. This paper explores whether a gender-neutral name is associated with the research impact of a scientist by examining three years of citations. The data for this study are derived from publications indexed in ISI's Web of Science (WoS) database from 2009 to 2015. By assigning a name neutralization index score to each author, we investigate the relationship between the neutralization index and citations and find the following results: (1) generally, the more neutral the name, the more citations the publications received; (2) the neutral effect was more pronounced for authors with feminine names than for authors with masculine names. © 2022
  • 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,
    Gender presence on the editorial boards of journals in the Women's Studies subject category Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Sixto-Costoya, Andrea
    ;
    Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo
    ;
    Castelló-Cogollo, Lourdes
    ;
    Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael
    ;
    Valderrama-Zurián, Juan Carlos
    In the scientific journals, being part of the editorial boards, including the journals' members and chief editors, involves holding positions of power and responsibility that affect the running of a journal. Until now, these positions have usually been held by men in most scientific disciplines. In this study, the gender composition in the editorial board members (EBMs) and editor-in-chief (ECs) of the 45 Women's Studies journals classified in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) was analyzed. The following indicators were calculated: the gender distribution of ECs and EBMs by journal, publisher, country, and quartile of the journal in the JCR; the geographical area of the members; and the gender distribution of the authors of papers grouped by journal, and geographical area. The gender distribution of the ECs was 92 % women, while that of the EBMs was 82.2 %. Regarding the articles and reviews published during 2019, a 72.4 % were signed by women. These results display an “inverted truncated pyramid”: the higher the level of decision-making positions is, the higher the percentage of women. On the other hand, the results by geographical area shows an Anglo-Saxon and European bias.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Google Scholar and Web of Science: Examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Andersen, J.P.
    ;
    Nielsen, M.W.
    Many studies demonstrate differences in the coverage of citing publications in Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS). Here, we examine to what extent citation data from the two databases reflect the scholarly impact of women and men differently. Our conjecture is that WoS carries an indirect gender bias in its selection criteria for citation sources that GS avoids due to criteria that are more inclusive. Using a sample of 1250 U.S. researchers in Sociology, Political Science, Economics, Cardiology and Chemistry, we examine gender differences in the average citation coverage of the two databases. We also calculate database-specific h-indices for all authors in the sample. In repeated simulations of hiring scenarios, we use these indices to examine whether women's appointment rates increase if hiring decisions rely on data from GS in lieu of WoS. We find no systematic gender differences in the citation coverage of the two databases. Further, our results indicate marginal to non-existing effects of database selection on women's success-rates in the simulations. In line with the existing literature, we find the citation coverage in WoS to be largest in Cardiology and Chemistry and smallest in Political Science and Sociology. The concordance between author-based h-indices measured by GS and WoS is largest for Chemistry followed by Cardiology, Political Science, Sociology and Economics. © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.