PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Gender StudiesViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Institutional

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women in Science. Experiences of Academics in Switzerland
    (Transcript, 2025-08-12)
    De Cia Annalisa
    ;
    Hellmüller, Sara
    ;
    Mesok Khan, Elizabeth
    Women in science face particular challenges, such as structural inequalities, highly competitive work environments, and at times toxic cultures. This collection conveys the experiences of women academics in Switzerland, featuring insights from twelve scholars across various universities and disciplines. Each contributor shares their unique journey in pursuit of a professorship, illustrating the rich diversity of the Swiss scientific community. This volume offers hope for those struggling with finding their place in science, emphasizing the joys and privileges that can be found in an academic career and the passion and perseverance of those pursuing it.
  • Item type:Publication,
    A bibliometric study of women researchers in early organizational structures of exact sciences and engineering in Mexico from 1900 to 2000 Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Morales, M.E.L.
    ;
    Morales, E.L.
    The scientific production of Mexico registered in Web of Science from 1900-2000 in the areas of Exact Sciences and Engineering is analyzed to describe the way in which female researchers are integrated in the development of these fields of study. The paper employs a quantitative bibliometric method, applying indicators of gender, scientific output and impact, and analysis of bibliometric networks of co-authorship. In Mexico, researchers in exact sciences and engineering published their first papers in the first half of the 20th century, but female researchers working in Syn-tex laboratories did not publish until the 1940s. As more women joined faculties in higher education and research centers in the 60s and 70s, publication by female researchers began to increase accordingly. This growth also appears to be associated with changes in career choice by women. While the contributions of this work represent an advantage for the scientific community itself, they also are useful for organizations that promote gender equity and institutions that integrate female researchers in this field of study. © 2018, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Can’t bibliometric analysts do better? How quality assessment without field expertise does not work: A comment on G. Madison and T. Söderlund: Comparisons of scientific quality indicators across peer-reviewed journal articles with more or less gender perspective: Gender studies can do better Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Lykke, N.
    The article is an invited comment on Guy Madison and Therese Söderlund (M&S): Comparisons of content and scientific quality indicators across peer-reviewed journal articles with more or less gender perspective: Gender studies can do better. Scientometrics 115(3):1161–1183. The article pinpoints a series of serious problems in M&S’s quantitative quality assessment and analysis of the field of gender studies, pertaining to their overall conceptual framework, their general approach and their specific analysis. It is argued that the over-arching problem in M&S’s study is their lack of expert knowledge of the field of gender studies, their lack of respect for differences between qualitative and quantitative research, and their research design, which is biased towards quantitative social and natural science research. Firstly, it is demonstrated that a key concept, ‘gender perspective’, is used in an incoherent and confusing way in M&S’s analysis. Secondly, it is argued that the confusion is not an isolated definitional problem, but related to a series of slippages between M&S’s source of inspiration (Ganetz in Genusvetenskapliga projektansökningar inom humaniora-samhällsvetenskap – en uppföljning av Vetenskapsrådets beredning och utfall år 2004. Vetenskapsrådets rapportserie, Stockholm 15/2005, 2005) and their own adoption of the category. Thirdly, differences between qualitative and quantitative research, and between hermeneutic and explanatory knowledge production, are discussed more broadly to sustain the argument that the mentioned slippages occur, because M&S transfer analytical tools from Ganetz’ qualitative study, based on a peer review methodology, to a quantitative quality assessment, carried out without field specific expert knowledge. It is argued that, to be adequate and relevant, a quality assessment would need to respect these differences, and develop tools and research designs accordingly. Fourthly, the validity of M&S’s content analysis—the core of their study—is questioned in detail because of its use of inadequate analytical categories, and because of its exclusion of central elements from the analysis. Finally, it is argued that the bias in M&S’s research design is reproduced in their results. © 2018, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Bibliometric studies on gender disparities in science
    (2019)
    Halevi, G.
    Understanding gender related disparities in science is an essential step in tackling these issues. Through the years, bibliometric studies have designed several methodologies to analyze scholarly output and demonstrate that there are significant gaps between men and women in the scientific arena. However, gender identification in itself is an enormous challenge, since bibliographic data does not reveal it. These bibliometric studies not only focused on publication output and impact, but also on cross-referencing output, promotions and tenure data, and other related curriculum vitae (CV) information. This chapter discusses the challenges of tracking gender disparities in science through bibliometrics and reviews the various approaches taken by bibliometricians to identify gender and analyze the bibliographic data in order to point to gender disparities in science. © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender and research publishing analyzed through the lenses of discipline, institution types, impact and international collaboration: a case study from India Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Paswan, J.
    ;
    Singh, V.K.
    Higher participation of women in higher education and research is a very important development goal in many countries across the world, with several countries creating special initiatives and schemes to increase participation of women in higher education and research. This article looks at a case study from India and aims to characterize the participation of women in research, by analysing the parameters of institution-type, discipline, citation impact and international collaboration. Research publication data from 50 most productive Indian institutions, along with data for 5 major institution systems, for a period of 10 years (2008–2017), as indexed in Web of Science, is obtained as sample data and analysed. Results obtained show that participation of women is found to vary in different disciplines, with biology (37%), agriculture science (32%), social science (31%) and medical science (32%) having relatively higher number of female 1st authored papers as compared to engineering (20%), information science (21%) and mathematics (22%). It is also observed that institutions specializing in medical sciences and social science have relatively better participation of women. In terms of location of institution in a big metropolitan city or an urban area, it was found that there do not exist any significant differentiation in levels of participation of women in research between institutions located in bigger cities or smaller towns. Further, analysis of citation and collaboration patterns show that though male authored papers have an edge in citation impact, women researchers get more internationally collaborated papers. © 2020, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.