PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 30

Gender divergence in academics’ representation and research productivity: a Nigerian case study Open PDF
(2017)
Opesade, A.O.
;
Famurewa, K.F.
;
Igwe, E.G.
Gender equity is increasingly seen as an indicator of development and global acceptance in networks of higher education. Despite this, gender divergence in research productivity of academics coupled with under-representation of women in science has been reported to beset female’s scholarly activities. Previous studies provide differing results, hence a need for each academic institution to know its status for the purpose of formulating appropriate policy towards achieving gender equity without trading off productivity. Using a scientometric method, the present study investigates the representation and research productivity of male and female lecturers in the Faculty of Science, University of Ibadan. The study shows that while female lecturers are significantly less represented in the faculty and publish in journals having lower impact factors, their research productivity in terms of number of publications and citation impact are significantly not different from those of their male counterparts. © 2017 Association for Tertiary Education Management and the LH Martin Institute for Tertiary Education Leadership and Management.
Identifying gender disparities in research performance: the importance of comparing apples with apples Open PDF
(2022)
Nygaard, L.P.
;
Aksnes, D.W.
;
Piro, F.N.
Many studies on research productivity and performance suggest that men consistently outperform women. However, women and men are spread unevenly throughout the academy both horizontally (e.g., by scientific field) and vertically (e.g., by academic position), suggesting that aggregate numbers (comparing all men with all women) may reflect the different publication practices in different corners of the academy rather than gender per se. We use Norwegian bibliometric data to examine how the “what” (which publication practices are measured) and the “who” (how the population sample is disaggregated) matter in assessing apparent gender differences among academics in Norway. We investigate four clusters of indicators related to publication volume, publication type, authorship, and impact or quality (12 indicators in total) and explore how disaggregating the population by scientific field, institutional affiliation, academic position, and age changes the gender gaps that appear at the aggregate level. For most (but not all) indicators, we find that gender differences disappear or are strongly reduced after disaggregation. This suggests a composition effect, whereby apparent gender differences in productivity can to a considerable degree be ascribed to the composition of the group examined and the different publication practices common to specific groups. We argue that aggregate figures can exaggerate some gender disparities while obscuring others. Our study illustrates the situated nature of research productivity and the importance of comparing men and women within similar academic positions or scientific fields—of comparing apples with apples—when using bibliometric indicators to identify gender disparities in research productivity. © 2022, The Author(s).
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 Ltd
How does research productivity relate to gender? Analyzing gender differences for multiple publication dimensions Open PDF
(2018)
Mayer, S.J.
;
Rathmann, J.M.K.
Measures of research productivity have become widely used for obtaining tenure, third-party funding, and additional resources from universities. However, previous studies indicate that men might have a higher research output than women, with mixed conclusions about the factors that drive these differences. This study explores to what extent the research productivity of psychology professors in Germany is related to gender and, furthermore, how any gender gaps can be explained by controlling for individual and organizational factors. In addition, three publication dimensions (publications in top 10% journals, journal articles, and book and collection chapters) are distinguished to determine the effect of gender on research productivity as precisely as possible. A unique data set based on all full professors in psychology in Germany and their publication record in 2013 and 2014 is used (Nauthors = 294; Narticles = 2252, Nchapters = 439). Thus, this study provides a current overview of the state of research productivity in an entire discipline after researchers receive tenure and external restrictions are lessened. Our research helps to further locate the point at which gender differences in publication numbers occur. As we are the first to systematically to analyze different publication types, we are able to show that there is no difference in publication numbers for less-prestigious book chapters. However, we find significant gender differences for research productivity in academic journals that are more important for career advancement and peer recognition, even after we control for the most important individual and organizational factors that might explain gender differences. Our results point to the direction that women do research and write manuscripts, but may have different publication patterns: instead of submitting to competitive journals, they may be satisfied with less-prestigious book chapters. As publications in peer-reviewed journals are especially important for career advancement as well as peer recognition, this publication pattern may be disadvantageous for women. Overall, we conclude that additional research to understand these developments is needed that focuses on the motives and beliefs of researchers, both to improve gender equality in academia and to give women better chances to gain recognition and prestige. © 2018, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology? Open PDF
(2015)
König, C.J.
;
Fell, C.B.
;
Kellnhofer, L.
;
Schui, G.
Questions about gender differences in the workplace usually attract much attention—but often generate more heat than light. To examine gender differences in several facets of scientific productivity and impact, a quantitative, scientometric approach is employed. Analyzing a sample of industrial and organizational psychologists (Nauthors = 4234; Npublications = 46,656), this study raises both questions and concerns about gender differences in research, by showing that female and male I–O psychologists differ with regard to publication output (fewer publications authored by female researchers), impact (heterogeneous, indicator-dependent gender differences), their publication career courses (male researchers’ periods of active publishing last longer and show longer interruptions), and research interests (only marginal gender differences). In order to get a glimpse of future developments, we repeated all analyses with the student subsample and found nearly no gender differences, suggesting a more gender-balanced future. Thus, this study gives an overview over the status quo of gender differences in an entire psychological sub-discipline. Future research will have to examine whether these gender differences are volitional in nature or the manifestation of external constraints. © 2015, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
Gender differences in the publication rate among breast imaging radiologists in the United States and Canada Open PDF
(2018)
Khurshid, K.
;
Shah, S.
;
Ahmadi, M.
;
Jalal, S.
;
Carlos, R.
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to determine whether academic achievement differs by gender among breast imaging radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We examined the gender disparity in academic breast radiology using several parameters, including the h-index, the number of publications, and the number of citations. We also inspected gender disparity in academic ranks and leadership ranks. RESULTS. The research productivity of female breast imagers was found to be significantly lower than that of male colleagues across all academic ranks (p < 0.001). In addition, no correlation was noted between female gender and leadership positions (p = 0.57), despite the fact that women dominate the specialty of breast imaging. CONCLUSION. The number of publications by female radiologists has risen steadily over time; however, a significant gender disparity is seen in scholarly productivity. �© American Roentgen Ray Society.
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.
How human capital, universities of excellence, third party funding, mobility and gender explain productivity in German political science Open PDF
(2021)
Habicht, I.M.
;
Lutter, M.
;
Schröder, M.
Using a unique panel dataset of virtually all German academic political scientists, we show that researchers become much more productive due to the accumulation of human capital and third party funding. We also show however, that while universities of excellence have more productive researchers, individuals who go there do not become more productive. Finally, we show how women publish only 9 percent less than men with the same level of prior publication experience, but are about 26 percent less productive over their entire career, as early productivity leads to later productivity, so that women increasingly fall behind. These results cannot be explained through the influence of childbearing. Rather, they support the ‘theory of limited differences’, which argues that small differences in early productivity accumulate to large differences over entire careers, as early success encourages later success. Apart from generally showing why political scientists publish more or less, we specifically identify accumulative advantage as the principal reason why women increasingly fall behind men over the course of their careers. © 2021, The Author(s).
Geographical and gender inequalities in health sciences studies: testing differences in research productivity, impact and visibility Open PDF
(2024)
Goyanes, M.
;
Demeter, M.
;
Háló, G.
;
Arcila-Calderón, C.
;
Gil de Zúñiga, H.
Purpose: Gender and geographical imbalance in production and impact levels is a pressing issue in global knowledge production. Within Health Sciences, while some studies found stark gender and geographical biases and inequalities, others found little empirical evidence of this marginalization. The purpose of the study is to clear the ambiguity concerning the topic. Design/methodology/approach: Based on a comprehensive and systematic analysis of Health Sciences research data downloaded from the Scival (Scopus/Scimago) database from 2017 to 2020 (n = 7,990), this study first compares gender representation in research productivity, as well as differences in terms of citation per document, citations per document view and view per document scores according to geographical location. Additionally, the study clarifies whether there is a geographic bias in productivity and impact measures (i.e. citation per document, citations per document view and view per document) moderated by gender. Findings: Results indicate that gender inequalities in productivity are systematic at the overall disciplinary, as well as the subfield levels. Findings also suggest statistically significant geographical differences in citation per document, citations per document view, and view per document scores, and interaction effect of gender over the relation between geography and (1) the number of citations per view and (2) the number of views per document. Originality/value: This study contributes to scientometric studies in health sciences by providing insightful findings about the geographical and gender bias in productivity and impact across world regions. © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited.
Gender Differences in Faculty Rank and Leadership Positions Among Physician Biochemistry Faculty in North America: A Retrospective, Cross-Sectional Study
(2021)
Tiwana, Muhammad Haaris
;
Sverdlichenko, Irina
;
Xuan, Lisa
;
Jalal, Sabeena
;
Tiwana, Sabeen
Purpose This study sought to assess gender differences among physician faculty in medical biochemistry and genetics programs in North America. It compared the distribution of academic and leadership ranks, years of active research, number of citations and publications, and Hirsch-index (h-index) by gender. Variable associations with the h-index were assessed. Method This was a cross-sectional retrospective study for which data was collected from June 2019 to October 2019 on academic and administrative physician faculty members for medical biochemistry and genetics programs. The website of Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database, Canadian Resident Matching Service website, and the medical biochemistry profile from the Canadian Medical Association to identify relevant programs and SCOPUS was used to gather faculty data. Results The analyses included 147 faculty members. More male faculty held higher academic rank positions and first-in-command leadership positions than female faculty. Men had more median years of active research, citation numbers, publication numbers, and h-index than women across all academic ranks. Upon performing multivariable linear regression, female faculty showed 0.39 times the odds of having a higher h-index than male faculty, keeping all other variables constant (p<0.01). Conclusions In our study, it was shown that male physician faculty surveyed had higher performance than female faculty in academic rank and research productivity. Certain barriers may be contributing factors, including lack of mentorship or flexible institutional policies, women choosing clinical educator tracks, or gender bias. Considering the low retention rates of women in academic research, there is a need to address barriers in order to achieve gender parity.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results