PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
6 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Gendered knowledge in fields and academic careers Open PDF(2022) ;Kim, Lanu ;Smith, Daniel Scott ;Hofstra, BasMcFarland, Daniel A.Women and men often contribute differently to research knowledge. Do differences in these contributions partially explain disparities in academic career outcomes? We explore this by looking at how gender is embodied in research language, and then ascertain whether the adoption of more gendered research language affects career outcomes beyond the researcher's attributes. We identify different forms of gendered knowledge—gender referents (explicit references to sex and gender) and gender-associated terms (words that are implicitly associated with women or men researchers)—by applying natural language processing techniques to nearly one million doctoral dissertations published in the United States between 1980 and 2010. We then determine whether employing gender referents and gender-associated terms affects the course of PhDs’ ensuing careers. We find women researchers have lower chances of securing academic positions than men in every field; explicit references to women as research subjects are modestly rewarded in comparison to references to men; and more career opportunities are afforded to research knowledge associated with men. These results suggest that academia is slowly correcting the traditional and explicit bias of studying men at the exclusion of women. Still, there remains a stronger implicit bias against knowledge associated with women scholars. We discuss relative differences between humanities and social sciences versus natural sciences, technology, engineering, and math, as well as potential treatments for offsetting bias in those fields.Item type:Publication, Greater female first author citation advantages do not associate with reduced or reducing gender disparities in academia Open PDF(2020) ;Thelwall, M.Sud, P.Ongoing problems attracting women into many Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects have many potential explanations. This article investigates whether the possible undercitation of women associates with lower proportions of, or increases in, women in a subject. It uses six million articles published in 1996–2012 across up to 331 fields in six mainly English-speaking countries: Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. The proportion of female first-and last-authored articles in each year was calculated and 4,968 regressions were run to detect first-author gender advantages in field normalized article citations. The proportion of female first authors in each field correlated highly between countries and the female first-author citation advantages derived from the regressions correlated moderately to strongly between countries, so both are relatively field specific. There was a weak tendency in the United States and New Zealand for female citation advantages to be stronger in fields with fewer women, after excluding small fields, but there was no other association evidence. There was no evidence of female citation advantages or disadvantages to be a cause or effect of changes in the proportions of women in a field for any country. Inappropriate uses of career-level citations are a likelier source of gender inequities. © 2020 Mike Thelwall and Pardeep Sud. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.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, Advancing women, parity, and gender equity Open PDF(2022) ;Garcia, M. Nathalia ;Andrews, Elizabeth A. ;White, Candice C. ;Dixon, Debra A.López, Ana N.For centuries, society has called out for transformations to lift all of its members. While it may seem ordinary in our time for women to be dentists or dental educators, the path was neither always easy, nor has true equity been achieved. The modern transformation of dental education and dentistry creates the need for leaders to propose and develop concrete initiatives to advance the profession and benefit society. Areas to address that could lead to increased equity for women include career advancement, leadership opportunities, compensation, career satisfaction, research, and scholarly activity. Our analysis demonstrates that even though the number of full-time female faculty has increased during recent years, most positions (59.5%) at dental schools in the US are held by men (2018-2019). Males were also compensated at higher rates than their female counterparts, and female deans made 7% less in total compensation. Because disparities are evident in pay and academic pathways, new directions and strategies must be employed to ensure parity and gender equity. Facilitating the progress of women in organized dentistry requires efforts of dental academic institutions to invest resources and provide nurturing environments that promote professional performances and leadership skills for women, with these being priorities-considering the current trends that anticipate increased numbers of women in dental academia. All dentists bring their own experiences to the profession, making for rich depth and diversity. As a collective voice, we have a bright future. We can and will move forward together.Item type:Publication, Predicting early career productivity of PhD economists: Does advisor-match matter? Open PDF(2020) ;García-Suaza, Andrés ;Otero, JesúsWinkelmann, RainerWe assess the role played by department rank and advisor-match on the early stage productivity of recent PhDs in economics using a tailor-made data set based on RePEc. After allowing for the potential influence of other factors, including gender and field of specialisation, we find as expected that both advisory quality and rank of the graduation institution are positively related to the academic productivity of graduates. However, in top institutions, students working with the most productive academics do not outperform others unless they co-author with their advisor. For students in non-top institutions, being advised by the best academics is always associated with a higher research output. Possible explanations for this difference are pointed out, including selection and differences in advising styles.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.