DSpace-CRIS

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Do bibliometrics introduce gender, institutional or interdisciplinary biases into research evaluations? Open PDF
(2023)
Thelwall, M.
;
Kousha, K.
;
Stuart, E.
;
Makita, M.
;
Abdoli, M.
Systematic evaluations of publicly funded research sometimes use bibliometrics alone or bibliometric-informed peer review, but it is not known whether bibliometrics introduce biases when supporting or replacing peer review. This article assesses this by comparing three alternative mechanisms for scoring 73,612 UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) journal articles from all 34 field-based Units of Assessment (UoAs) 2014–17: REF peer review scores, field normalised citations, and journal average field normalised citation impact. The results suggest that in almost all academic fields, bibliometric scoring can disadvantage departments publishing high quality research, as judged by peer review, with the main exception of article citation rates in chemistry. Thus, introducing journal or article level citation information into peer review exercises may have a regression to the mean effect. Bibliometric scoring slightly advantaged women compared to men, but this varied between UoAs and was most evident in the physical sciences, engineering, and social sciences. In contrast, interdisciplinary research gained from bibliometric scoring in about half of the UoAs, but relatively substantially in two. In conclusion, out of the three potential sources of bibliometric bias examined, the most serious seems to be the tendency for bibliometric scores to work against high quality departments, assuming that the peer review scores are correct. This is almost a paradox: although high quality departments tend to get the highest bibliometric scores, bibliometrics conceal the full extent of departmental quality advantages, as judged by peer review. This should be considered when using bibliometrics or bibliometric informed peer review. © 2023 The Authors
Do women undertake interdisciplinary research more than men, and do self-citations bias observed differences? Open PDF
(2022)
Pinheiro, H.
;
Durning, M.
;
Campbell, D.
Some studies have shown that women undertake interdisciplinary research more than men, whereas other studies have shown no difference by gender. Women have also been shown to self-cite less often than men, a difference at least partly mediated through differences in career stages and prior productivity. Existing evidence on gender-based differences in interdisciplinarity may therefore be biased. If interdisciplinarity is inferred from the disciplinary diversity of a paper’s cited references, a greater share of self-citations by men could decrease their measured interdisciplinarity relative to women. Such biases could lead to erroneous conclusions, because after correcting for self-citations one might uncover that women participate in interdisciplinary research equally to, or less than, men. Given that funding for interdisciplinary research is gaining in importance, obtaining accurate measurements of interdisciplinarity by gender is highly relevant for funders so that they can take appropriate action(s) in leveling the playing field across gender. For instance, evidence suggests women are sometimes advised not to participate in interdisciplinary research due to the risk it represents for their career progression. This study shows that a paper’s interdisciplinarity increases with the presence of female authors, accounting or not for self-citations in the interdisciplinarity measurement. © 2022 Henrique Pinheiro, Matt Durning, and David Campbell.
The specific shapes of gender imbalance in scientific authorships: A network approach Open PDF
(2017)
Araújo, T.
;
Fontainha, E.
Gender differences in collaborative research have received little attention when compared with the growing importance that women hold in academia and research. Unsurprisingly, most of bibliometric databases have a strong lack of directly available information by gender. Although empirical-based network approaches are often used in the study of research collaboration, the studies about the influence of gender dissimilarities on the resulting topological outcomes are still scarce. Here, networks of scientific subjects are used to characterize patterns that might be associated to five categories of authorships which were built based on gender. We find enough evidence that gender imbalance in scientific authorships brings a peculiar trait to the networks induced from papers published in Web of Science (WoS) indexed journals of Economics over the period 2010–2015 and having at least one author affiliated to a Portuguese institution. Our results show the emergence of a specific pattern when the network of co-occurring subjects is induced from a set of papers exclusively authored by men. Such a male-exclusive authorship condition is found to be the solely responsible for the emergence of that particular shape in the network structure. This peculiar trait might facilitate future network analysis of research collaboration and interdisciplinarity. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results