PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.GenderViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Student Level

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item type:Publication,
    Do females create higher impact research? Scopus citations and Mendeley readers for articles from five countries Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Thelwall, M.
    There are known gender imbalances in participation in scientific fields, from female dominance of nursing to male dominance of mathematics. It is not clear whether there is also a citation imbalance, with some claiming that male-authored research tends to be more cited. No previous study has assessed gender differences in the readers of academic research on a large scale, however. In response, this article assesses whether there are gender differences in the average citations and/or Mendeley readers of academic publications. Field normalised logged Scopus citations and Mendeley readers from mid-2018 for articles published in 2014 were investigated for articles with first authors from India, Spain, Turkey, the UK and the USA in up to 251 fields with at least 50 male and female authors. Although female-authored research is less cited in Turkey (-4.0%) and India (-3.6%), it is marginally more cited in Spain (0.4%), the UK (0.4%), and the USA (0.2%). Female-authored research has fewer Mendeley readers in India (-1.1%) but more in Spain (1.4%), Turkey (1.1%), the UK (2.7%) and the USA (3.0%). Thus, whilst there may be little practical gender difference in citation impact in countries with mature science systems, the higher female readership impact suggests a wider audience for female-authored research. The results also show that the conclusions from a gender analysis depend on the field normalisation method. A theoretically informed decision must therefore be made about which normalisation to use. The results also suggest that arithmetic mean-based field normalisation is favourable to males. © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Does Gender Bias Still Affect Women in Science? Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Roper, Rachel L.
    The percentage of women employed in professional scientific positions has been low but is increasing over time. The U.S. National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation have both implemented programs to improve women's participation in science, and many universities and companies have diversity and equity programs. While most faculty and scientists believe that they are fair and unbiased, numerous well-designed studies published in leading peer-reviewed journals show that gender bias in sciences and medicine is widespread and persistent today in both faculty and students. Recent studies show that gender bias affects student grading, professional hiring, mentoring, tenure, promotion, respect, grant proposal success, and pay. In addition, sexual harassment remains a significant barrier. Fortunately, several studies provide evidence that programs that raise conscious awareness of gender bias can improve equity in science, and there are a number of recommendations and strategies for improving the participation of women.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The role of gender-specific factors in the choice of specialty training in obstetrics and gynecology: results from a survey among medical students in Germany Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Riedel, Maximilian
    ;
    Hennigs, André
    ;
    Dobberkau, Anna Maria
    ;
    Riedel, Caroline
    ;
    Bugaj, Till Johannes
    PURPOSE: The field of obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) is facing growing competition for young professionals in Germany, with high interest rates among female graduates and a declining proportion of male students who choose residency training in the field. The aim of this study is to analyze general and gender-dependent factors that influence the decision for or against specialty training in OB/GYN among medical students in Germany. METHODS: Between February and November 2019, n = 346 medical students in their 5th and 6th year of undergraduate training at Heidelberg University received a questionnaire with 44 items. RESULTS: n = 286 students (61.3 female; 38.7% male) participated in the study. 28% of the female students and 9% of the male students had considered OB/GYN for their specialty training. The students reported different general and gender-specific influencing factors in their choice of a specialty. Both genders desired a good work-life-balance, however, in comparison with their female colleagues, male students had heavily weighted factors related to their later careers and professional success, including competition among colleagues. Male students had gained little practical experience during compulsory internships (26.9% for females vs. 8.8% for males) or had chosen their final-year elective in OB/GYN (15.9% for females vs. 5.5% for males). Female students had worried about the negative effects of their sex on their career (35.4% for females vs. 5.9% for males). CONCLUSION: OB/GYN must become more appealing and attractive to young female and male professionals alike. A better compatibility of career and family should go hand in hand with the implementation of differentiated, (extra) curricular teaching approaches that take the different preferences of female and male students into account.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Perceived Supports and Barriers for Career Development for Second-Year STEM Students Open PDF 
    (2016)
    Peña-Calvo, José-Vicente
    ;
    Inda-Caro, Mercedes
    ;
    Rodríguez-Menéndez, Carmen
    ;
    Fernández-García, Carmen-María
    Background This study was designed to determine the effect of perceived supports and barriers on self-efficacy beliefs and other social-cognitive variables related to second-year science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students' career development. Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) states that career interest is influenced by four cognitive-person variables: self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, interests, and goals. Other variables, such as social supports and barriers, also play an important role. Purpose This study explores the influence of gender and STEM major on perceived supports and barriers. It also analyzes the effects of perceived supports and barriers on the SCCT cognitive-person variables. Method Participants were 811 sophomore students in STEM programs at the University of Oviedo, Asturias, Spain. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests analyzed the difference in the perceived supports and barriers by gender and students' major. Multiple-group structural equation modeling was implemented to predict the relationship between perceived supports and barriers and SCCT cognitive-person variables. Results The engineering students perceived more teaching staff barriers and fewer teaching staff supports than other students. Male software and hardware engineering students perceived more barriers than other male engineering students. The fit of the model revealed an important effect of perceived teaching staff supports on the four cognitive-person variables. Conclusions To determine the influences on the cognitive-person variables, it is necessary to analyze the perceived supports and barriers. Peers and family are the most important perceived supports, while teaching staff and financial difficulties are the greatest perceived barriers.