PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Language: search.filters.language.EnglishSubject: search.filters.subject.Academic Publishing

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Item type:Publication,
    Authorship and citation trends in dementia research: A path to equitable career development for scientists Open PDF 
    (Wiley, 2026-06)
    Viswanathan, Jayalakshmi
    ;
    Karamacoska, Diana
    ;
    Thakur, Lokendra S.
    ;
    Sawan, Mouna
    ;
    Gomez‐Arboledas, Angela
    Abstract Introduction: Women are increasingly entering the dementia research workforce, but they frequently fail to attain senior leadership positions in academia. Discrepancies in academic research outputs were investigated to guide equity-focused policy recommendations. Methods: Bibliometrics was conducted on 400,482 original research articles (2003-2022) followed by surveying the AD/ADRD research community, to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate discrepancies in publication and authorship trends. In addition, an unsupervised learning algorithm was developed to analyze underlying relationships between author groups. Results: Male author gender was consistently predictive of better publication and citation metrics across all bibliometrics outcomes, with senior male authors outperforming all other subgroups and fewer senior female authors in most research areas. Female survey respondents reported more barriers, but comparable productivity and citation strategies as male authors. Discussion: Multi-pronged approaches by stakeholders across institutions, funders, and journals are necessary to provide career support for early-career scientists working to transition to senior research roles.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Narrowing gender gap in the research on echinococcosis and editorial contribution of women in parasitology journals Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Kaveh, R.
    ;
    Ashrafhesari, N.
    ;
    Mousavi, S.M.
    ;
    Fasihi Harandi, M.
    Gender equity and authorship diversity are believed to be the essential parts of building a dynamic scientific atmosphere. The purpose of the present study was to determine the status of gender equity in research on echinococcosis and the editorial diversity in major parasitology journals over the past four decades. All articles were retrieved from major databases from the years 1980, 2000, 2010, 2015, and 2020. Journals belonging to the four quartiles of parasitology journals listed in the Journal Citation Report were selected, and the gender and region of each editorial member were identified. Among the 3583 first authors of the articles published in all selected years, 2236 (62.4%) were men, whereas 1040 (29%) were women. There was a significant increase in women's contributions as the first author, from 6.8% in 1980 to 35.8% in 2020 (P <.001). A greater gender gap was found for the senior authors, showing 2391 (66.7%) men and 837 (23.4%) women. The gender gap has been narrowed in most of the six regions of the world, particularly for the Western Pacific region, where the gender inequity had almost diminished in 2020; i.e.The man-woman ratios of the first and last authors from this region were 2.25 and 1.75 in 1980, reaching 1.04 and 0.97, in 2020, respectively. Our findings also indicated that articles authored by men received 2.5 to 3.1 times more citations than women authors. Gender distribution of the editors-in-chief, associate editors, and editorial board members across all quartiles showed that 78.7%, 69.5%, and 72.7% were men, respectively, and mostly affiliated with the European and American regions. Findings of the present study showed that gender inequity is still present and women researchers continue to be the minority in the field of parasitology, particularly in the research on echinococcosis. © The Author(s), 2024.
  • Item type:Publication,
    First-author gender differentials in business journal publishing: top journals versus the rest Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Joanis, S.T.
    ;
    Patil, V.H.
    Prior literature suggests that the publication rates of female academics are less than the publication rates of male academics. This holds true in nearly every academic field and in every region, but these differences are declining over time. Women also are underrepresented in the first-author byline position. This study examines academics working and publishing in different business disciplines, and it addresses three distinct topics. It investigates (1) whether there is a relationship between the gender of first-listed authors of articles published and the ranking of journals; (2) it considers the relationship between the gender of the first-listed author of articles and different disciplines within business, specifically accounting, business technology, marketing, and organizational behavior; and (3) it evaluates how the publication rates of the two genders of first authors change over a 20-year period (1999–2018) for different disciplines. This research demonstrates that the gender gap is closing for female first authors in business academics, but that parity has not yet been reached. Women continue to be published less frequently in first-author positions in journals across all business disciplines studied, but especially in the higher-ranked journals, albeit with significant differences between business academic disciplines. © 2021, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
  • Item type:Publication,
    A gender equality paradox in academic publishing: Countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored journal articles have larger first-author gender disparities between fields Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Thelwall, M.
    ;
    Mas-Bleda, A.
    Current attempts to address the shortfall of female researchers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) have not yet succeeded, despite other academic subjects having female majorities. This article investigates the extent to which gender disparities are subject-wide or nation-specific by a first-author gender comparison of 30 million articles from all 27 Scopus broad fields within the 31 countries with the most Scopus-indexed articles 2014–2018. The results show overall and geocultural patterns as well as individual national differences. Almost half of the subjects were always more male (seven; e.g., Mathematics) or always more female (six; e.g., Immunology & Microbiology) than the national average. A strong overall trend (Spearman correlation 0.546) is for countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored research to also have larger differences in gender disparities between fields (correlation 0.314 for gender ratios). This confirms the international gender equality paradox previously found for degree subject choices: Increased gender equality overall associates with moderately greater gender differentiation between subjects. This is consistent with previous United States-based claims that gender differences in academic careers are partly due to (socially constrained) gender differences in personal preferences. Radical solutions may therefore be needed for some STEM subjects to overcome gender disparities. © 2020 Mike Thelwall and Amalia Mas-Bleda. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Author gender differences in psychology citation impact 1996–2018 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Thelwall, M.
    Academic psychology in the USA is a gender success story in terms of overturning its early male dominance but there are still relatively few senior female psychology researchers. To assess whether there are gender differences in citation impact that might help to explain either of these trends, this study investigates psychology articles since 1996. Seven out of eight Scopus psychology categories had a majority of female first-authored journal articles by 2018. From regression analyses of first and last author gender and team size, female first authors associate with a slightly higher average citation impact, but extra authors have a 10 times stronger association with higher average citation impact. Last author gender has little association with citation impact. Female first authors are more likely to be in larger teams and if team size is attributed to the first author's work, then their apparent influence of female first authors on citation impact doubles. While gender differences in average citation impact are too small to account for gender-related trends in academic psychology, they warn that male-dominated citation-based ranking lists of psychologists do not reflect the state of psychology research today. © 2019 International Union of Psychological Science
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Representation on Editorial Boards of JAMA Network Journals Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Schaechter, Judith D.
    ;
    Jacobs, Jeremy W.
    ;
    Booth, Garrett S.
    ;
    Dupont, William D.
    ;
    Silver, Julie K.
    Objective: Underrepresentation of women on editorial boards of biomedical journals has occurred for decades. The JAMA Network Journals have substantial and broad impact on advances in the biomedical sciences. We sought to determine the current status of gender representation on editorial boards of the 12 JAMA Network Journals. Methods: The gender of each editorial board member of the 12 JAMA Network Journals was classified based on review of online sources. The percentage of women on each board (i.e., number of women relative to total members) was calculated and compared to gender equity and parity benchmarks. The gender equity benchmark for each journal was defined as the percentage of women physicians in the medical specialty reflecting the journal's content based on Association of American Medical Colleges data. The gender parity benchmark for all journals was defined as 50% women. Results: There was considerable variation in the representation of women on the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals relative to gender equity and parity benchmarks. Women were underrepresented on 50% (6 of 12) of boards relative to gender equity and 67% (8 of 12) of boards relative to gender parity. Conclusions: Women were found to be underrepresented on 50% or more of the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals. This finding reflects gender inequities in academic publishing and the broader biomedical enterprise, which limits advances in the biomedical sciences and health care. Those JAMA Network Journals that continue to underrepresent women on their editorial boards are urged to remediate this longstanding issue.