PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Language: search.filters.language.EnglishSubject: search.filters.subject.Collaboration Patterns

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Are female scientists less inclined to publish alone? The gender solo research gap Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Kwiek, M.
    ;
    Roszka, W.
    In solo research, scientists compete individually for prestige, sending clear signals about their research ability, avoiding problems in credit allocation, and reducing conflicts about authorship. We examine to what extent male and female scientists differ in their use of solo publishing across various dimensions. This research is the first to comprehensively study the “gender solo research gap” among all internationally visible scientists within a whole national higher education system. We examine the gap through mean “individual solo publishing rates” found in “individual publication portfolios” constructed for each Polish university professor. We use the practical significance/statistical significance difference (based on the effect-size r coefficient) and our analyses indicate that while some gender differences are statistically significant, they have no practical significance. Using a partial effects of fractional logistic regression approach, we estimate the probability of conducting solo research. In none of the models does gender explain the variability of the individual solo publishing rate. The strongest predictor of individual solo publishing rate is the average team size, publishing in STEM fields negatively affects the rate, publishing in male-dominated disciplines positively affects it, and the influence of international collaboration is negative. The gender solo research gap in Poland is much weaker than expected: within a more general trend toward team research and international research, gender differences in solo research are much weaker and less relevant than initially assumed. We use our unique biographical, administrative, publication, and citation database (“Polish Science Observatory”) with metadata on all Polish scientists present in Scopus (N = 25,463) and their 158,743 Scopus-indexed articles published in 2009–2018, including 18,900 solo articles. © 2022, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender bias in journals of gender studies Open PDF 
    (2012)
    Kretschmer, H.
    ;
    Kundra, R.
    ;
    Beaver, D.d.B.
    ;
    Kretschmer, T.
    The causes of gender bias favoring men in scientific and scholarly systems are complex and related to overall gender relationships in most of the countries of the world. An as yet unanswered question is whether in research publication gender bias is equally distributed over scientific disciplines and fields or if that bias reflects a closer relation to the subject matter. We expected less gender bias with respect to subject matter, and so analysed 14 journals of gender studies using several methods and indicators. The results confirm our expectation: the very high position of women in co-operation is striking; female scientists are relatively overrepresented as first authors in articles. Collaboration behaviour in gender studies differs from that of authors in PNAS. The pattern of gender studies reflects associations between authors of different productivity, or "masters" and "apprentices" but the PNAS pattern reflects associations between authors of roughly the same productivity, or "peers". It would be interesting to extend the analysis of these three-dimensional collaboration patterns further, to see whether a similar characterization holds, what it might imply about the patterns of authorship in different areas, what those patterns might imply about the role of collaboration, and whether there are differences between females and males in collaboration patterns. © 2012 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Contemporary psychology and women: A gender analysis of the scientific production Open PDF 
    (2019)
    González-Álvarez, J.
    ;
    Cervera-Crespo, T.
    Despite important advances made in recent decades, women are still underrepresented in science (less than 30% of authorships). This study presents a bibliometric analysis of all the Psychology articles published in 2009 included in the Web of Science database (Thomson Reuters) in order to examine the contribution of women in contemporary Psychology, their pattern of research collaboration, the scientific content and the scientific impact from a gender perspective. From a total of 90,067 authorships, gender could be identified in 74,413 (82.6%) of them, being 40,782 (54.8%) male authorships and 33,631 (45.2%) female authorships. These data corresponded to 24,477 (49.9%) individual men and 24,553 (50.1%) women, respectively. Therefore, Psychology presents gender parity in the number of authors, and a gender asymmetry in the number of authorships that it is much lower than in science in general and other specific scientific fields. In relative terms, women tend to be concentrated in the first position of the authorship by-line and much less in the last (senior) position. This double pattern suggests that age probably plays a role in (partly) explaining the slight gender disparity of authorships. © 2017 International Union of Psychological Science
  • Item type:Publication,
    Research production in high-impact journals of contemporary neuroscience: A gender analysis Open PDF 
    (2017)
    González-Álvarez, J.
    ;
    Cervera-Crespo, T.
    Neuroscience or Neural Science is a very active and interdisciplinary field that seeks to understand the brain and the nervous system. In spite of important advances made in recent decades, women are still underrepresented in neuroscience research output as a consequence of gender inequality in science overall. This study carries out a scientometric analysis of the 30 neuroscience journals (2009–2010) with the highest impact in the Web of Science database (Thomson Reuters) in order to quantitatively examine the current contribution of women in neuroscientific production, their pattern of research collaboration, scientific content, and the analysis of scientific impact from a gender perspective. From a total of 66,937 authorships, gender could be identified in 53,351 (79.7%) of them. Results revealed that 67.1% of the authorships corresponded to men and 32.9% to women. In relative terms, women tend to be concentrated in the first position of the authorship by-line (which could be a reflection of new female incorporations into neuroscience research publishing their first studies), and much less in the last (senior) position. This double pattern suggests that age probably plays a role in (partly) explaining gender asymmetry, both in science in general and in neuroscience in particular. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences in Collaboration Patterns in Computer Science Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Yamamoto, J.
    ;
    Frachtenberg, E.
    The research discipline of computer science (CS) has a well-publicized gender disparity. Multiple studies estimate the ratio of women among publishing researchers to be around 15–30%. Many explanatory factors have been studied in association with this gender gap, including differences in collaboration patterns. Here, we extend this body of knowledge by looking at differences in collaboration patterns specific to various fields and subfields of CS. We curated a dataset of nearly 20,000 unique authors of some 7000 top conference papers from a single year. We manually assigned a field and subfield to each conference and a gender to most researchers. We then measured the gender gap in each subfield as well as five other collaboration metrics, which we compared to the gender gap. Our main findings are that the gender gap varies greatly by field, ranging from 6% female authors in theoretical CS to 42% in CS education; subfields with a higher gender gap also tend to exhibit lower female productivity, larger coauthor groups, and higher gender homophily. Although women published fewer single-author papers, we did not find an association between single-author papers and the ratio of female researchers in a subfield. © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.