PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 12

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.
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.
Gender Bias in Higher Education: Spanish Doctoral Dissertations in Mathematics Education Open PDF
(2016)
Vallejo, M.
;
Torralbo, M.
;
Fernández-Cano, A.
This article reviews the results of a quantitative study that provides evidence of gender biases in relation to women in the field of Spanish mathematics education. For this purpose, doctoral dissertations produced in Spain and defended in Spanish universities between 1970 and 2014 were subjected to exhaustive analysis. Focusing on gender, the authorship, supervision, and evaluation of doctoral dissertations were used as explanatory variables. A prospective analysis of the variables was also carried out. The results reveal different situations depending on the above-mentioned dimensions. Specifically, a marked bias against women was detected in terms of the supervision and evaluation of doctoral dissertations, but not in terms of their authorship. This seems to suggest the existence of a glass ceiling that prevents women from gaining access to certain scientific fields and/or engaging in particular roles in the higher education setting, such as the supervision or evaluation of doctoral dissertations. © The Author(s) 2015.
Gender Representation on Journal Editorial Boards in the Mathematical Sciences Open PDF
(Public Library of Science, 2016)
Topaz, Chad M.
;
Sen, Shilad
We study gender representation on the editorial boards of 435 journals in the mathematical sciences. Women are known to comprise approximately 15% of tenure-stream faculty positions in doctoral-granting mathematical sciences departments in the United States. Compared to this group, we find that 8.9% of the 13067 editorships in our study are held by women. We describe group variations within the editorships by identifying specific journals, subfields, publishers, and countries that significantly exceed or fall short of this average. To enable our study, we develop a semi-automated method for inferring gender that has an estimated accuracy of 97.5%. Our findings provide the first measure of gender distribution on editorial boards in the mathematical sciences, offer insights that suggest future studies in the mathematical sciences, and introduce new methods that enable large-scale studies of gender distribution in other fields.
The Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. Open PDF
(2018)
Stoet, Gijsbert
;
Geary, David C.
The underrepresentation of girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields is a continual concern for social scientists and policymakers. Using an international database on adolescent achievement in science, mathematics, and reading ( N = 472,242), we showed that girls performed similarly to or better than boys in science in two of every three countries, and in nearly all countries, more girls appeared capable of college-level STEM study than had enrolled. Paradoxically, the sex differences in the magnitude of relative academic strengths and pursuit of STEM degrees rose with increases in national gender equality. The gap between boys' science achievement and girls' reading achievement relative to their mean academic performance was near universal. These sex differences in academic strengths and attitudes toward science correlated with the STEM graduation gap. A mediation analysis suggested that life-quality pressures in less gender-equal countries promote girls' and women's engagement with STEM subjects.
Gender and research publishing analyzed through the lenses of discipline, institution types, impact and international collaboration: a case study from India Open PDF
(2020)
Paswan, J.
;
Singh, V.K.
Higher participation of women in higher education and research is a very important development goal in many countries across the world, with several countries creating special initiatives and schemes to increase participation of women in higher education and research. This article looks at a case study from India and aims to characterize the participation of women in research, by analysing the parameters of institution-type, discipline, citation impact and international collaboration. Research publication data from 50 most productive Indian institutions, along with data for 5 major institution systems, for a period of 10 years (2008–2017), as indexed in Web of Science, is obtained as sample data and analysed. Results obtained show that participation of women is found to vary in different disciplines, with biology (37%), agriculture science (32%), social science (31%) and medical science (32%) having relatively higher number of female 1st authored papers as compared to engineering (20%), information science (21%) and mathematics (22%). It is also observed that institutions specializing in medical sciences and social science have relatively better participation of women. In terms of location of institution in a big metropolitan city or an urban area, it was found that there do not exist any significant differentiation in levels of participation of women in research between institutions located in bigger cities or smaller towns. Further, analysis of citation and collaboration patterns show that though male authored papers have an edge in citation impact, women researchers get more internationally collaborated papers. © 2020, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
A global approach to the gender gap in mathematical, computing and natural sciences: How to measure it, how to reduce it? Open PDF
(Academy of Science of South Africa, 2019)
Gledhill, I.M.A.
;
Roy, M.-F.
;
Chiu, M.-H.
;
Ivie, R.
;
Ponce-Dawson, S.
The participation of women in many fields of science remains a subject of concern worldwide. In this Commentary, we describe one of three collaborative projects – the Gender Gap project – funded by the International Science Council (ISC) and the 11 partners of the project. This project is the only one of the three that addresses an issue of such relevance for society. The objectives of the project are to provide evidence on which interventions can be based, and to make available material on best practice that has been proven by test. The project includes a joint global survey and a bibliometric analysis, both of which have an emphasis on comparing and contrasting results from less developed countries and from more developed countries.
Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science Open PDF
(2011)
Ceci, S.J.
;
Williams, W.M.
Explanations for women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields of science often focus on sex discrimination in grant and manuscript reviewing, interviewing, and hiring. Claims that women scientists suffer discrimination in these arenas rest on a set of studies undergirding policies and programs aimed at remediation. More recent and robust empiricism, however, fails to support assertions of discrimination in these domains. To better understand women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields and its causes, we reprise claims of discrimination and their evidentiary bases. Based on a review of the past 20 y of data, we suggest that some of these claims are no longer valid and, if uncritically accepted as current causes of women's lack of progress, can delay or prevent understanding of contemporary determinants of women's underrepresentation. We conclude that differential gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices, whether free or constrained, and that such choices could be influenced and better informed through education if resources were so directed. Thus, the ongoing focus on sex discrimination in reviewing, interviewing, and hiring represents costly, misplaced effort: Society is engaged in the present in solving problems of the past, rather than in addressing meaningful limitations deterring women's participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers today. Addressing today's causes of underrepresentation requires focusing on education and policy changes that will make institutions responsive to differing biological realities of the sexes. Finally, we suggest potential avenues of intervention to increase gender fairness that accord with current, as opposed to historical, findings.
Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields Open PDF
(SAGE Publications Inc, 2010)
Ceci, Stephen J.
;
Williams, Wendy M.
Despite impressive employment gains in many fields of science, women remain underrepresented in fields requiring intensive use of mathematics. Here we discuss three potential explanations for women’s underrepresentation: (a) male–female mathematical and spatial ability gaps, (b) sex discrimination, and (c) sex differences in career preferences and lifestyle choices. Synthesizing findings from psychology, endocrinology, sociology, economics, and education leads to the conclusion that, among a combination of interrelated factors, preferences and choices—both freely made and constrained—are the most significant cause of women’s underrepresentation.
Women's underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations Open PDF
(American Psychological Association, 2009)
Ceci, Stephen J.
;
Williams, Wendy M.
;
Barnett, Susan M.
The underrepresentation of women at the top of math-intensive fields is controversial, with competing claims of biological and sociocultural causation. The authors develop a framework to delineate possible causal pathways and evaluate evidence for each. Biological evidence is contradictory and inconclusive. Although cross-cultural and cross-cohort differences suggest a powerful effect of sociocultural context, evidence for specific factors is inconsistent and contradictory. Factors unique to underrepresentation in math-intensive fields include the following: (a) Math-proficient women disproportionately prefer careers in non–math-intensive fields and are more likely to leave math-intensive careers as they advance; (b) more men than women score in the extreme math-proficient range on gatekeeper tests, such as the SAT Mathematics and the Graduate Record Examinations Quantitative Reasoning sections; (c) women with high math competence are disproportionately more likely to have high verbal competence, allowing greater choice of professions; and (d) in some math-intensive fields, women with children are penalized in promotion rates. The evidence indicates that women's preferences, potentially representing both free and constrained choices, constitute the most powerful explanatory factor; a secondary factor is performance on gatekeeper tests, most likely resulting from sociocultural rather than biological causes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results