PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Geographical Area: search.filters.geographical.ItalySubject: search.filters.subject.Gender

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Breaking the glass door in academia? Looking at the role of scientific fields and contextual factors in moderating the gender gap in recruitment: evidence from Italy Open PDF 
    (Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-07-15)
    Gaiaschi, Camilla
    Women's presence in academia has sharply increased in recent years, but gender inequalities in career progression persist. Italy makes no exception to this trend as different studies on the promotion gap to associate and to full professors have suggested. However, no measure of the adjusted gender differential in the previous steps of the career, that is in the transition from the post-doc to the assistant professor position, has been provided so far. This paper aims to fulfill this gap by means of an original, longitudinal, and multi-source dataset on the Italian academic population which has allowed to measure the female disadvantage in recruitment by controlling for a large set of confounding characteristics including individual productivity and, most especially, contextual factors, which have been under-explored so far. Results suggest that women face a small adjusted penalty, of around 3-4%, in academic recruitment. However, when disentangling the analyses by scientific field, strong differences emerge, with the gap reaching a maximum of - 10% in physics while being non-significant in many SSH. Within the STEMM, the life sciences, driven by medicine and biology, appear more gender unequal than many hard sciences. Moreover, a growing number of female full professors in the sub-field and working in a department with good financial resources represent two factors that have a moderate role in reducing the gap. All in all, this work sheds light on the importance of organizational and institutional factors in explaining the gender gap thus calling for structural interventions to make universities more inclusive towards women.
  • Item type:Publication,
    ‘Being good isn’t good enough’: gender discrimination in Italian academia Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Filandri, M.
    ;
    Pasqua, S.
    The article analyses the effect of gender in professors’ career advancement using data on the entire population of professors in the Italian university system, data on the National Scientific Qualification (NSQ) accreditation scheme, and data on scientific productivity (SciVal) for bibliometric scientific sectors. As NSQ accreditation is a prerequisite for career advancement in Italian universities, using this data makes it possible to rule out women’s reluctance to apply for promotions -candidate professors must apply for accreditation- as a mechanism for explaining the gender gap in academia. Our results show a relevant gender gap in career advancement that is not explained by gender differences in productivity (above the minimum level needed to obtain the accreditation). A structural gender bias also remains after controlling for available resources and for the percentage of female full professors in the academic scientific sector. The results contribute to the debate on the introduction of gender quotas. © 2019 Society for Research into Higher Education.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessment of gender divide in scientific communities Open PDF 
    (2021)
    De Nicola, A.
    ;
    D’Agostino, G.
    Increasing evidence of women’s under-representation in some scientific disciplines is prompting researchers to expand our understanding of this social phenomenon. Moreover, any countermeasures proposed to eliminate this under-representation should be tailored to the actual reasons for this different participation. Here, we take a multi-dimensional approach to assessing gender differences in science by representing scientific communities as social networks, and using data analytics, complexity science methods, and semantic methods to measure gender differences in the context, the attitude and the success of scientists. We apply this approach to four scientific communities in the two fields of computer science and information systems using the network of authors at four different conferences. For each discipline, one conference is based in Italy and attracts mostly Italians, while one conference is international in both location and participants. The present paper provides evidence against common narratives that women’s under-representation is due to women’s limited skills and/or less social centrality. © 2021, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Diversity of backgrounds and ideas: The case of research evaluation in economics Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Corsi, Marcella
    ;
    D’Ippoliti, Carlo
    ;
    Zacchia, Giulia
    This paper contributes to the literature on the effect of research evaluation in terms of preserving and reproducing diversity. Through a large-scale natural experiment encompassing two entire cohorts of Italian economists, we document how candidates for academic positions, especially top-tier positions, in economics are pushed to increasingly conform to a standardised research profile. We find evidence of gender bias in research evaluation and observe substantial variability in the chances of qualifying for an academic position, depending on candidates’ main fields, topics and methods of research. Our results also indicate that economists working on less popular research fields and/or with heterodox methods are less likely to qualify for top-tier academic positions, independently of their bibliometric indicators.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Should the research performance of scientists be distinguished by gender? Open PDF 
    (2015)
    Abramo, G.
    ;
    Cicero, T.
    ;
    D'Angelo, C.A.
    The literature on gender differences in research performance seems to suggest a gap between men and women, where the former outperform the latter. Whether one agrees with the different factors proposed to explain the phenomenon, it is worthwhile to verify if comparing the performance within each gender, rather than without distinction, gives significantly different ranking lists. If there were some structural factor that determined a penalty in performance of female researchers compared to their male peers, then under conditions of equal capacities of men and women, any comparative evaluations of individual performance that fail to account for gender differences would lead to distortion of the judgments in favor of men. In this work we measure the extent of differences in rank between the two methods of comparing performance in each field of the hard sciences: for professors in the Italian university system, we compare the distributions of research performance for men and women and subsequently the ranking lists with and without distinction by gender. The results are of interest for the optimization of efficient selection in formulation of recruitment, career advancement and incentive schemes. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.