PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 15
  • Item type:Publication,
    A Protocol to Assess Contextual Factors During Program Impact Evaluation: A Case Study of a STEM Gender Equity Intervention in Higher Education Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Nobrega, S
    ;
    Edwards, K
    ;
    El Ghaziri, M
    ;
    Giacobbe, L
    ;
    Rice, S
    Program evaluations that lack experimental design often fail to produce evidence of impact because there is no available control group. Theory-based evaluations can generate evidence of a program's causal effects if evaluators collect evidence along the theorized causal chain and identify possible competing causes. However, few methods are available for assessing competing causes in the program environment. Effect Modifier Assessment (EMA) is a method previously used in smaller-scale studies to assess possible competing causes of observed changes following an intervention. In our case study of a university gender equity intervention, EMA generated useful evidence of competing causes to augment program evaluation. Top-down administrative culture, poor experiences with hiring and promotion, and workload were identified as impeding forces that might have reduced program benefits. The EMA addresses a methodological gap in theory-based evaluation and might be useful in a variety of program settings.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender, coauthorship and impact: publications of Peruvian biology researchers (1994-2017) Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Málaga-Saboga, L.
    ;
    Sagasti, F.
    This study explores the role of gender in the networks of co-authorship publications, the impact of articles written by two or more authors, and the influence of high-impact articles on the academic careers. We analyze Peruvian biology researchers with publications in Web of Science Core Collection and SciELO Citation Index, as well as the curricula of the authors of greatest impact publications. A significant imbalance has been found in the number of male and female researchers as well as a significant disproportion of the number of documents published. The co-authorship network formation is not affected by gender, but women have high betweenness levels less frequently, which probably affects their effect on information flow. Finally having published a high impact research is related to promotion for junior researchers, both men and women. © 2021 CSIC. Este es un artículo de acceso abierto bajo los términos de la licencia de uso y distribución Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Predicting the future impact of Computer Science researchers: Is there a gender bias? Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Kuppler, M.
    The advent of large-scale bibliographic databases and powerful prediction algorithms led to calls for data-driven approaches for targeting scarce funds at researchers with high predicted future scientific impact. The potential side-effects and fairness implications of such approaches are unknown, however. Using a large-scale bibliographic data set of N = 111,156 Computer Science researchers active from 1993 to 2016, I build and evaluate a realistic scientific impact prediction model. Given the persistent under-representation of women in Computer Science, the model is audited for disparate impact based on gender. Random forests and Gradient Boosting Machines are used to predict researchers’ h-index in 2010 from their bibliographic profiles in 2005. Based on model predictions, it is determined whether the researcher will become a high-performer with an h-index in the top-25% of the discipline-specific h-index distribution. The models predict the future h-index with an accuracy of R2= 0.875 and correctly classify 91.0% of researchers as high-performers and low-performers. Overall accuracy does not vary strongly across researcher gender. Nevertheless, there is indication of disparate impact against women. The models under-estimate the true h-index of female researchers more strongly than the h-index of male researchers. Further, women are 8.6% less likely to be predicted to become high-performers than men. In practice, hiring, tenure, and funding decisions that are based on model predictions risk to perpetuate the under-representation of women in Computer Science. © 2022, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    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.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Career Levels and Their Effect on Scholarly Output and Impact of Women Scientists Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Halevi, G.
    ;
    Bar-Ilan, J.
    In this article we examined the scholarly output and impact of 81 women scientist at the Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Mount Sinai. The group was divided into three career level sub-groups based on the first year of publication of each scientist. We examined the number of publications, citations, readership and social media attention per each group. Our findings show that although senior faculty have more publications and overall citations, junior faculty receive more citations and more readership per paper. We also found that different career level faculty members receive different social media mentions. Mid-career faculty see more tweets that mention their research while senior faculty get more likes, shares and clicks via Facebook. © 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences and cooperation in medical authorships - an analysis of the recent ten years in five key medical disciplines Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Yamamura, J.
    ;
    Molwitz, I.
    ;
    Ozga, A.-K.
    ;
    Nguyen, T.-A.
    ;
    Wedekind, I.
    Background: Career prospects in academic medicine are strongly linked to scientific authorship and this marker has been widely used as an indicator of gender equity in academia. However, direct comparisons of medical disciplines regarding their proportion of female physicians (FP) in different countries are missing. This study examines the gender parity and gender cooperation using first authorships (FA) and senior authorships (SA) of scientific publications in five medical disciplines and six different OECD countries over a 10-year time-trend. Methods: Articles from three high-impact journals in each of the medical discipline radiology, urology, surgery, gynecology, and pediatrics from the years 2007/8 and 2017/18 were retrospectively reviewed. The gender and affiliation location of the FA and SA of original research articles and reviews were assigned and compared with the proportion of in each discipline for the United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan. Mantel-Haenszel test and multinomial logistic regression models were used to calculate differences in proportions of women authors and FP and to assess trends and proportions of FA and SA. Results: 30,803 articles were evaluated. Equally, with rising proportions of FP in all disciplines, the number of women authors increased across years. The shares of women FAs were either significantly higher (urology/surgery/gynecology) or balanced (pediatrics/radiology) compared to the proportion of FP. In contrast, the shares of women SA were balanced only in disciplines with a low proportion of FP (urology and surgery) and otherwise reduced. Women same-gender cooperation was as common as men same-gender cooperation and preferred over a women-led mixed gender cooperation in disciplines where this seemed to be practicable due to the high proportions of FP. Conclusion: In contrast to FA, a significant disparity persists in SA, particularly in disciplines with a high proportion of FP. The discrepancy between FA and SA may reflect, among others, dropout from an academic career in early or mid-academic levels, for example, due to structural inequality; together with the findings on gender preference in authorship collaborations, this may inform future strategies for promoting equal career advancement for women physicians. © 2023, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    One hundred most-cited articles in head and neck surgery and analysis of female authorship Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Trent, M.S.
    ;
    Michelle, L.
    ;
    Roman, K.
    ;
    Kim, J.K.
    ;
    Haidar, Y.M.
    Background: While female head and neck surgeons have made significant contributions to the field, women's achievements in scientific communication have traditionally been underreported. Methods: A search of high-impact journals in the field of head and neck surgery was performed in the Elsevier's Scopus database to identify the top 100 most-cited articles. Results: The top 100 most-cited articles (during the span of 1953 and 2016) had the highest total number of citations between 2005 and 2009. Women accounted for 36% of first authors and 25% of corresponding authors. Change in the relative number of first female authors in these top 100 articles did not increase significantly between 1950 and 2019. Conclusion: The proportion of female first authors in head and neck surgery has not significantly increased over the past several decades, despite greater numbers of female trainees. Our findings support the need for additional research on female representation in head and neck surgery. © 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Observable and unobservable causes of the gender gap in S&T funding for young researchers Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Suarez, D
    ;
    Fiorentin, F
    ;
    Pereira, M
    The objective of this paper is to study the relationship between academic performance, gender, and science and technology grants. The empirical analysis is based on the Argentinean Fund for Scientific and Technological Research 'Scientific and Technological Research Projects' (FONCYT-PICT). The methodology is based on a multivariate decomposition for non-linear response models, an extension of the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition. Results confirm the presence of a gender gap. Women have lower probabilities of being awarded with funds than men, even when academic trajectories are alike. Results show that even if the productivity gap is closed, men's and women's trajectories are differently valued against women, and this negatively impacts their probability of being awarded. Therefore, even if women manage to publish more and-somehow-be more cited, the gap will persist. Explicit public policy measures are required to close the current gap and stop reproducing it.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences in science: The case of scientific productivity in Nano Science & Technology during 2005-2007 Open PDF 
    (2014)
    Sotudeh, H.
    ;
    Khoshian, N.
    Although, women's contribution to science is crucial to social development, gender difference has been for a long time affecting the quantity and quality of scholarly activity. In spite of some improvements, women are still suffering from gender gap and biases in science world. Using a scientometric method with a comparative approach, the present communication aims to study women performance in Nano Science & Technology in terms of their scientific productivity and impact and to contrast them to their male counterparts. The significance of the study relies on the importance of a balanced development of human society in general and in different scientific milieus in specific. According to the research results, although female Nano-researchers are scarce in number, they equally perform in terms of scientific productions and impacts. That may imply gender egalitarianism in the field. © 2013 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Addressing gender inequality in science: The multifaceted challenge of assessing impact Open PDF 
    (2017)
    Schmidt, E.K.
    ;
    Cacace, M.
    The analysis of the reasons behind the persistent under-representation of women in senior positions in science is well-developed. In contrast, the assessment of the impact of policies addressing the problem suffers from a lack of evidence and an oversimplification of approaches. Based on the assessment of 125 programs for gender equality implemented in research organizations in Europe, North America, and Australia, we argue that holistic approaches and multidimensional frames of reference are needed for impact assessment, also to improve program design and policy. Our analysis shows that the problem of gender inequality is rooted in so many and interrelated factors that program impact assessment has to be multidimensional and complex. Having a conceptual approach grounded in the notion of complexity as a point of departure, the article presents an innovative impact assessment tool, pointing to effective ways to assess the impact of gender equality programs. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.