PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
6 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, What's in a number? How (and why) measuring research productivity in different ways changes the gender gap Open PDF(2018) ;Nygaard, L.P.Bahgat, K.A persistent finding in studies of research productivity is the ‘gender gap’ where men seem to publish more academic research than women. However, this gap varies widely from study to study, and little has been done to explore how these claims might be sensitive to what is being measured and how. Using a dataset of publications statistics spanning five years for a Norwegian social science research institute, this paper looks at how (and why) measuring productivity in different ways provides different pictures of the gender gap. Based on the situated context of the institute, we also disaggregate the data by staff category, methodological orientation, and language background, and consider the impact of leaves of absence. We find widely varying measures of the gender gap depending on how we measure and disaggregate, and argue that different bibliometric indicators capture different aspects of research performance, including diversity of output and collaboration, which reflect different publication practices that are both gendered and situated. We suggest that looking at academic writing as a situated - and gendered - social practice offers a potential for deriving more theoretically consistent explanations for both the seeming persistence of the gender gap and the wide contextual variations. © 2018 Elsevier LtdItem type:Publication, Scientific Performance Assessments Through a Gender Lens: a Case Study on Evaluation and Selection Practices in Academia(2018)Nielsen, Matthias WullumThe focus on excellence and quality assurance in the academy has spawned a significant increase in the use of bibliometric measures in performance assessments of individual researchers. This article investigates the organizational consequences of this development through a gender lens. Based on a qualitative case study of evaluation and selection practices at a Danish university, a number of potential gender biases related to the use of bibliometric performance measures are identified. By taking as default the research preferences, approaches and career paths of a succesful group of predominantly male scholars, evaluators using bibliometrics risk disadvantaging candidates diverging from the norm with implications for gender stratification. Despite these potential biases, bibliometric measures come to function as technologies supporting a managerial narrative of the gender-blind organization. They adhere to the prevailing ethos of the academic meritocracy by standardizing the criteria for organizational advancement and ensuring transparency and accountability in the selection process. While bibliometric tools in this sense may lead to the recruitment of scientists with a strong CV and track record, they may at the same time prevent many talented researchers diverging from the norm from being recognized and succeed as academics.Item type:Publication, Gender consequences of a national performance-based funding model: new pieces in an old puzzle Open PDF(2017)Nielsen, M.W.This article investigates the extent to which the Danish Bibliometric Research Indicator (BRI) reflects the performance of men and women differently. The model is based on a differentiated counting of peer-reviewed publications, awarding three and eight points for contributions to ‘well-regarded’ and highly selective journals and book publishers, and 1 and 5 points for equivalent scientific contributions via ‘normal level’ channels. On the basis of bibliometric data, the study shows that the BRI considerably widens the existing gender gap in researcher performance, since men on average receive more BRI points for their publications than women. The article suggests two probable explanations: (A) women merely comprise 24% of the committee members determining which publication channels to classify as ‘well-regarded’ and ‘normal’, which may lead to biases in the classification process. (B) The model privileges collaborative research, which disadvantages women due to gender differences in collaborative network relations. © 2015 Society for Research into Higher Education.Item type:Publication, Early career performance and its correlation with gender and publication output during doctoral education Open PDF(2020) ;Lindahl, J. ;Colliander, C.Danell, R.Publishing in peer-reviewed journals as a part of the doctoral education is common practice in many countries. The publication output of doctoral students is increasingly used in selection processes for funding and employment in their early careers. Against the backdrop of this development, the aim of this study is to examine (1) how performance during the doctoral education affect the probability of attaining research excellence in the early career; and (2) if there is performance differences between males and females in the early career and to which degree these gender differences can be explained by performance differences during the doctoral education. The data consist of Swedish doctoral students employed at the faculty of science and technology and the faculty of medicine at a Swedish university. Our main conclusions are that (1) research performance during the doctoral education has a positive effect on attaining excellence in the early career; (2) there is an interaction between publication volume and excellence during doctoral education suggesting that a combination of quantity and quality in doctoral students’ performance is indicative of future excellence; (3) there are performance differences in the early career indicating that males have a higher probability of attaining excellence than females, and; (4) this difference is partly explained by performance differences during the doctoral education. © 2019, The Author(s).Item type:Publication, Publication rate expressed by age, gender and academic position - A large-scale analysis of Norwegian academic staff Open PDF(2015) ;Rørstad, K.Aksnes, D.W.This study investigates how scientific performance in terms of publication rate is influenced by the gender, age and academic position of the researchers. Previous studies have shown that these factors are important variables when analysing scientific productivity at the individual level. What is new with our approach is that we have been able to identify the relative importance of the different factors based on regression analyses (OLS) of each major academic field. The study, involving almost 12,400 Norwegian university researchers, shows that academic position is more important than age and gender. In the fields analysed, the regression model can explain 13.5-19 per cent of the variance in the publication output at the levels of individuals. This also means that most of the variance in publication rate is due to other factors. © 2015 The Authors.Item type:Publication, Effects of scholar's gender and professional position on publishing productivity in different publication types. Analysis of a Finnish university Open PDF(2010)Puuska, H.-M.This paper examines the effects of a scholar's position and gender on publishing productivity in several types of scientific publications: monographs, articles in journals, articles in edited books, and articles in conference proceedings. The data consist of 1,367 scholars who worked at the University of Helsinki, Finland, during the period 2002-2004. The analysis shows that professors are the most productive, PhDs publish more than non-PhDs, and men perform better than women, also when other scholarly characteristics are controlled for. These differences are greater for monographs and articles in edited books than for articles in journals. In terms of conference proceedings, no remarkable productivity differences were found. © 2009 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.