PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 54

Unpacking mathematical gender stereotypes: trends and directions from 25 years of research Open PDF
(Frontiers Media SA, 2025-11-18)
Nurlu, Özge
Gender norms shape multiple domains, including mathematics-long framed as a male-dominated field-thereby fostering pervasive mathematical gender stereotypes (MGS) that affect individuals' participation and achievement. This study aims to systematically synthesize empirical research published between 1999 and 2024, indexed in Web of Science, written in English, and available in full text. Only articles explicitly examining MGS were included; studies focused on broader STEM stereotypes, non-English publications, records without full-text access, and papers outside the specified time window were excluded. Limitations include the absence of protocol pre-registration-although inclusion/exclusion criteria and the analysis plan were specified in writing prior to the search and PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed-and the unavoidable subjectivity in interpretation and categorization despite established inter-coder reliability. Analyses indicate that most studies are situated in psychology, frequently employ experimental designs, and primarily sample university students. Surveys dominate data collection, and parametric inferential statistics are commonly used. Geographically, the literature is concentrated in Western countries-particularly the United States and Germany-with limited contributions from the Global South. Publication counts fluctuate over time, with notable peaks in 2012 and 2022. Conceptually, the literature converges on two principal axes: (i) belief/domain-ownership formulations centered on male superiority and (ii) process-based formulations centered on ST. Less frequently examined yet theoretically informative extensions include endorsement, internalization, counter-stereotypic role models, and stereotype lift. Across qualitative, descriptive, correlational, mediation, meta-analytic, and experimental evidence, findings consistently cluster around these axes, with stereotype endorsement and MGS occupying central positions. Taken together, the results underscore the need for future research that is more interdisciplinary, cross-cultural, and methodologically diverse to more comprehensively address MGS.
Women Emergency Physicians and Gender Disparities from Entry to Advancement Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2026-07)
Sethuraman, Kinjal N.
;
Lall, Michelle D.
;
Gorman, Emily F.
;
Zeidan, Amy J.
;
Agrawal, Pooja
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to summarize the last 20 years of published research on gender experience and disparities in the emergency medicine workforce. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching MEDLINE ALL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from 2003 to 2024, to identify original research investigating gender experience and disparities among physicians in emergency medicine in North America. We abstracted study design, sample characteristics, and outcomes. We analyzed data using an ad hoc iterative thematic analysis of the content areas as well as a synthesis of the key findings and research limitations. RESULTS: We identified 5,740 candidate publications and, after exclusions, included 191 (99% observational studies). We identified 15 themes: (1) workforce, (2) childbearing, (3) attrition, (4) evaluations, (5) bias and discrimination, (6) wellness, (7) professional development groups and mentorship, (8) authorship, (9) editorial board membership, (10) research grants, (11) national speakers, (12) awards, (13) leadership roles, (14) academic rank and promotion, (15) financial compensation and one subtheme (pediatric emergency medicine). We mapped these themes to 5 domains: (1) Recruitment and Retention, (2) Culture and Environment, (3) Academic Scholarship, (4) Recognition and Promotion, and (5) Clinical Care and Decisionmaking. There were 3 to 33 publications per theme. The quality of evidence was variable. We found fewer disparities, and improvement over time in the percentage of women academic faculty, women authorship, national speaking, and educational awards. We found consistent evidence of gender disparities disadvantaging women emergency physicians in financial compensation, editorial board membership, executive leadership roles, academic rank, and experiences of gender bias, with little change over time. CONCLUSION: Although some areas remain understudied, our central findings confirm that gender-based disparities continue to exist among emergency physicians. Future efforts should be redirected toward the development and assessment of interventions that combat these disparities.
Bias in Student Evaluations of Surgical Attendings: Role of Gender, Race, Age and Experience Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2026-06)
Theis, Claudia
;
Jacob, Anusha S.
;
Kapadia, Muneera Rehana
;
Pascarella, Luigi
Introduction Student evaluations influence faculty promotion but may reflect implicit bias. We assessed whether surgeon gender, race, age, and experience were associated with differences in student evaluations at a large academic medical center. Materials and methods This retrospective cohort study included 149 surgical attendings evaluated by medical students at the University of North Carolina between 2016 and 2020. Quantitative evaluation items were rated on 5-point Likert scales and analyzed using surgeon-level summary comparisons (Wilcoxon rank-sum and Kruskal–Wallis tests), evaluation-level multivariable logistic regression, and generalized estimating equations (GEEs) to account for clustering of multiple evaluations per attending. Qualitative free-text comments were analyzed using a validated natural language processing framework and summarized on a 5-point sentiment scale. Results A total of 149 surgical attendings were evaluated, including 39 women (26.2%) and 110 men (73.8%). The racial and ethnic distribution was 102 White (68.5%), 28 Asian (18.8%), 13 Black (8.7%), and 6 Latino (4.0%). In total, 2475 quantitative evaluations were analyzed, of which 1542 (62.3%) included narrative comments. The median time in practice was 14 y (Q1-Q3: 9-22), and the median time at the University of North Carolina was 11 y (Q1-Q3: 7-19.5). Median composite quantitative evaluation scores were lower for women than for men (4.42 [4.32-4.61] versus 4.61 [4.40-4.82] on a 5-point scale; P = 0.002). In GEE models accounting for clustering of evaluations within attendings and adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and years in practice, women remained independently associated with lower evaluation scores (β = −0.206; 95% confidence interval: −0.294 to −0.118; P < 0.001). Composite evaluation scores did not differ significantly across racial or ethnic groups (Kruskal–Wallis P = 0.40), and race was not a significant predictor in adjusted models (GEE P = 0.13). Attendings aged ≥50 y had lower unadjusted evaluation scores than younger colleagues (P = 0.03); however, age was not independently associated with evaluation scores after clustering adjustment (GEE P = 0.14). Qualitative sentiment scores were uniformly high (median 4.0 [Q1-Q3: 4.0-4.5]) and did not differ by gender, race, or age. Conclusions Women surgeons received lower quantitative scores than their male colleagues, despite similarly positive qualitative feedback. Age differences were observed in unadjusted analyses but were attenuated after accounting for clustering, whereas no significant differences were observed by race or years in practice. Although absolute score differences were modest, these findings suggest that commonly used student evaluation metrics may reflect gender-related bias and should be interpreted cautiously in academic surgical assessment.
Women in surgical academic Careers: What is needed to get there? Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2026-02)
Bosman, A.
;
Schreurs, W.H.
;
Smidt, M.L.
Despite comprising the majority of medical students, women remain significantly underrepresented in senior academic surgical positions. In the Netherlands, only 15.6 % of surgical professors are female. This article examines cultural and structural barriers, including unequal access to networks, underrepresentation on editorial boards, academic “housework,” implicit bias, and unequal caregiving responsibilities, that hinder women's advancement in academic surgery. Targeted interventions such as mentorships, flexible work policies, salary transparency, and gender-conscious recruitment (e.g., Eindhoven University of Technology's preferential hiring strategy) have shown promise in promoting equity without compromising academic output. The “critical mass” threshold of 28 % female representation emerges as a tipping point for cultural change. Achieving gender equity in academic surgery requires both systemic reform and cultural transformation to ensure equal opportunity, career sustainability, and inclusive institutional environments.
Exploring gender disparities in first authorship in anatomy during last two decades Open PDF
(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-02-21)
Singal, Anjali
;
Goyal, Swati
Abstract Purpose In scientific literature, authorship serves as a vital form of symbolic capital, with first authorship especially signifying active research involvement. This study examines the presence and magnitude of the gender gap in Anatomy research authorship and tracks its progression over the past twenty years in five esteemed journals. To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the trend of female first authorship within the subject. Methods PubMed search for all the published articles in five reputed Anatomical journals (2004–2023) was performed to get the bibliographic details of each article. Rentrez package was used to retrieve full name and affiliation. The first authors from the Department of Anatomy, Morphology, Embryology and Histology were included. Gender of the first author was assessed using Namsor API. The proportions of female first authors were presented as percentage stratified year-wise and geographically. A Mann-Kendall trend test statistics was applied to observe the significance of trends. Results One third of publications were by female first authors in Anatomy in last two decades. Continent wise, Africa and North America had the highest and lowest female representation. Participation of female as first authors was relatively consistent across journals (31.6 -34.8%). Though trend for female first authors increased in 2023 (38.8%) as compare to in 2004 (28.9%), however Mann-Kendall trend test statistics indicate no significant increase in yearly trend (p = 0.552) during last twenty years. Conclusions Globally males continue to dominate the prestigious first authorship in Anatomy except in India and Italy. Future research is needed to fully understand the obstacles preventing female representation as first authors in different geographic areas in this discipline.
Gender Bias in the Study of Genital Evolution: Females Continue to Receive Less Attention than Males Open PDF
(2022)
Orbach, D. N.
The evolution of female genitalia has historically received less attention than male reproductive organs. Several papers have underscored the disparities in research efforts, but have calls for change resonated with the scientific community and rectified the skew? A literature review was conducted of journal articles published between 2013 through 2021 that explore genital evolution to determine if gender bias (sex of research subject) and imbalance (sex of researcher) have changed. Of the 334 articles that specifically explored genital evolution, first authors of both sexes published on female genitalia less than half as often as male genitalia, although the majority of authors published on genitalia of both sexes. First authors of both sexes mentioned females after males substantially more often than females before males. Female first authors published the most about genital evolution in all taxa except for insects and arachnids. Female first authors published in high impact journals marginally less often than male first authors. Articles about genital evolution across taxa generally had high impact factors, but how impact factors and number of citations varied by the sex of the subject was not clear. Although the number of studies exploring genital co-evolution between the sexes has increased across taxa and years, female genitalia continue to be researched less often than male genitalia when only one sex is investigated. Both female and male scientists are publishing in the field of genital evolution, although research on female subjects continue to lag behind males, demonstrating continued bias within the discipline.
Gender disparities in scholarly productivity of US academic surgeons Open PDF
(Academic Press Inc., 2016)
Mueller, C.M.
;
Gaudilliere, D.K.
;
Kin, C.
;
Menorca, R.
;
Girod, S.
Background Female surgeons have faced significant challenges to promotion over the past decades, with attrition rates supporting a lack of improvement in women's position in academia. We examine gender disparities in research productivity, as measured by the number of citations, publications, and h-indices, across six decades. Materials and methods The online profiles of full-time faculty members of surgery departments of three academic centers were reviewed. Faculty members were grouped into six cohorts by decade, based on year of graduation from medical school. Differences between men and women across cohorts as well as by academic rank were examined. Results The profiles of 978 surgeons (234 women and 744 men) were reviewed. The number of female faculty members in the institutions increased significantly over time, reaching the current percentage of 35.3%. Significant differences in number of articles published were noted at the assistant and full but not at the associate, professor level. Women at these ranks had fewer publications than men. Gender differences were also found in all age cohorts except among the most recent who graduated in the 2000s. The impact of publications, as measured by h-index and number of citations, was not consistently significantly different between the genders at any age or rank. Conclusions We identified a consistent gender disparity in the number of publications for female faculty members across a 60-year span. Although the youngest cohort, those who graduated in the 2000s, appeared to avoid the gender divide, our data indicate that overall women still struggle with productivity in the academic arena. © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
A Feminist Quality Appraisal Tool: exposing gender bias and gender inequities in health research Open PDF
(Routhledge, 2017)
Morgan, T.
;
Williams, L.A.
;
Gott, M.
Quality appraisal tools used in systematic reviews to evaluate health literature do not adequately address issues related to gender. This oversight is significant because disparities between genders have been identified as a major health equity concern, and systematic reviews are regarded as a powerful means for informing policy that could redress gender inequities. In this paper, we present our Feminist Quality Appraisal Tool that offers researchers a template to undertake a comprehensive gendered analysis of studies they review. Informed by a feminist perspective, the tool addresses issues of power, gender and inequity, thereby giving researchers the means to interrogate the scientific rigour of systematic reviews that focus on gender. Specifically, our tool outlines ways gender can be critically examined in terms of study design, data collection, analysis, discussion and recommendations. We argue that this tool has the potential to improve the provision of public health by providing solid understandings and critical reflections on the reasons why women continue to face barriers in their access to optimal health care. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
High-Citation Papers in Space Physics: Examination of Gender, Country, and Paper Characteristics Open PDF
(2018)
Moldwin, M.B.
;
Liemohn, M.W.
The number of citations to a refereed journal article from other refereed journal articles is a measure of its impact. Papers, individuals, journals, departments, and institutions are increasingly judged by the impact they have in their disciplines, and citation counts are now a relatively easy (though not necessarily accurate or straightforward) way of attempting to quantify impact. This study examines papers published in the Journal of Geophysical Research—Space Physics in the year 2012 (n = 705) and analyzes the characteristics of high-citation papers compared to low-citation papers. We find that high-citation papers generally have a large number of authors (>5) and cite significantly more articles in the reference section than low-citation papers. We also examined the gender and country of institution of the first author and found that there is not a statistically significant gender bias, but there are some significant differences in citation statistics between articles based on the country of first-author institution. ©2018. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
Authorship in top-ranked mathematical and physical journals: Role of gender on self-perceptions and bibliographic evidence Open PDF
(2020)
Mihaljević, H.
;
Santamaría, L.
Despite increasing rates of women researching in math-intensive fields, publications by female authors remain underrepresented. By analyzing millions of records from the dedicated bibliographic databases zbMATH, arXiv, and ADS, we unveil the chronological evolution of authorships by women in mathematics, physics, and astronomy. We observe a pronounced shortage of female authors in top-ranked journals, with quasistagnant figures in various distinguished periodicals in the first two disciplines and a significantly more equitable situation in the latter. Additionally, we provide an interactive open-access web interface to further examine the data. To address whether female scholars submit fewer articles for publication to relevant journals or whether they are consciously or unconsciously disadvantaged by the peer review system, we also study authors’ perceptions of their submission practices and analyze around 10,000 responses, collected as part of a recent global survey of scientists. Our analysis indicates that men and women perceive their submission practices to be similar, with no evidence that a significantly lower number of submissions by women is responsible for their underrepresentation in top-ranked journals. According to the self-reported responses, a larger number of articles submitted to prestigious venues correlates rather with aspects associated with pronounced research activity, a well-established network, and academic seniority. © 2020 Helena Mihaljević and Lucía Santamaría.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results