scholarly journals A gender equality paradox in academic publishing: Countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored journal articles have larger first-author gender disparities between fields

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 1260-1282
Author(s):  
Mike Thelwall ◽  
Amalia Mas-Bleda
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Gender Disparities ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Gender Comparison ◽  
Gender Differentiation ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
National Differences ◽  
And Mathematics

Current attempts to address the shortfall of female researchers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) have not yet succeeded, despite other academic subjects having female majorities. This article investigates the extent to which gender disparities are subject-wide or nation-specific by a first-author gender comparison of 30 million articles from all 27 Scopus broad fields within the 31 countries with the most Scopus-indexed articles 2014–2018. The results show overall and geocultural patterns as well as individual national differences. Almost half of the subjects were always more male (seven; e.g., Mathematics) or always more female (six; e.g., Immunology & Microbiology) than the national average. A strong overall trend (Spearman correlation 0.546) is for countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored research to also have larger differences in gender disparities between fields (correlation 0.314 for gender ratios). This confirms the international gender equality paradox previously found for degree subject choices: Increased gender equality overall associates with moderately greater gender differentiation between subjects. This is consistent with previous United States-based claims that gender differences in academic careers are partly due to (socially constrained) gender differences in personal preferences. Radical solutions may therefore be needed for some STEM subjects to overcome gender disparities.

scholarly journals Gender Differences in Academic Efficacy across STEM Fields

2021 ◽  
pp. 073112142110286
Author(s):  
Jennifer Ashlock ◽  
Miodrag Stojnic ◽  
Zeynep Tufekci
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Meaning Making ◽  
Stem Fields ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Middle Schoolers ◽  
Self Assessments ◽  
Math Grades ◽  
And Mathematics

Cultural processes can reduce self-selection into math and science fields, but it remains unclear how confidence in computer science develops, where women are currently the least represented in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). Few studies evaluate both computer skills and self-assessments of skill. In this paper, we evaluate gender differences in efficacy across three STEM fields using a data set of middle schoolers, a particularly consequential period for academic pathways. Even though girls and boys do not significantly differ in terms of math grades and have similar levels of computer skill, the gender gap in computer efficacy is twice as large as the gap for math. We offer support for disaggregation of STEM fields, so the unique meaning making around computing can be addressed.

Queen’s Gambit Declined: The Gender-Equality Paradox in Chess Participation Across 160 Countries

2022 ◽  
pp. 095679762110348
Author(s):  
Allon Vishkin
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Mediation Analyses ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Generational Shift ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Curvilinear Effect

The gender-equality paradox refers to the puzzling finding that societies with more gender equality demonstrate larger gender differences across a range of phenomena, most notably in the proportion of women who pursue degrees in science, technology, engineering, and math. The present investigation demonstrates across two different measures of gender equality that this paradox extends to chess participation ( N = 803,485 across 160 countries; age range: 3–100 years), specifically that women participate more often in countries with less gender equality. Previous explanations for the paradox fail to account for this finding. Instead, consistent with the notion that gender equality reflects a generational shift, mediation analyses suggest that the gender-equality paradox in chess is driven by the greater participation of younger players in countries with less gender equality. A curvilinear effect of gender equality on the participation of female players was also found, demonstrating that gender differences in chess participation are largest at the highest and lowest ends of the gender-equality spectrum.

Will We Ever Close the Gender Gap Among Top Mathematics Achievers? Analysis of Recent Trends by Race in Advanced Placement (AP) Exams

2021 ◽  
pp. 016235322110445
Author(s):  
A. Kadir Bahar
Keyword(s):  
Advanced Placement ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Gender Disparity ◽  
Gender Disparities ◽  
Women In Science ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Ap Calculus ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
Underrepresentation Of Women ◽  
And Mathematics

Analyzing the test scores of more than 10,000,000 students who participated in the Advanced Placement (AP) math exams from 1997 to 2019, this study examined the direction and magnitude of the trend in gender disparity by race in participation in and top achievement on AP Calculus AB, Calculus BC, and Statistics exams. The results of this study indicated that, in general, females’ representation in all three AP exams increased significantly. Although the findings indicated that the female-to-male ratios (FMRs) in participation in the AP math exams increased significantly from 1997 to 2019 and favored females for all races, the gender disparities among top achievers for all math exams are still substantial. The relationships between the FMRs in participation and top achievement for all AP math exams were also analyzed within races, and the possible impacts of these findings within the context of the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields were also discussed.

scholarly journals Exploring the Odds: Gender Differences in Departing the Engineering Profession

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 446-461
Author(s):  
Nadya A. Fouad ◽  
Michael B. Kozlowski ◽  
Romila Singh ◽  
Nina G. Linneman ◽  
Samantha S. Schams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Engineering Profession ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Large Sample ◽  
The Past ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Theory Of Work Adjustment ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Categorical Response ◽  
Scholarly Inquiry

Women’s departure or nonentrance into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics professions, particularly engineering, has been a lively source of scholarly inquiry for the past three decades. Much of the literature in this area has been with solely female samples of participants, begging the question as to whether or not men and women either choose to leave the profession or not enter for the same or similar reasons. This present study collected a large sample of men ( n = 1,273) who had either left or never entered the engineering profession and compared their responses to a large sample of women ( n = 1,235) on a set of categorical response variables. Using the perspective of the Theory of Work Adjustment, our results suggest that there are gender differences in reasons for departure, raising the possibility that engineering climates differentially reinforce needs for men and women. Implications of this research are discussed.

scholarly journals One Size Does Not Fit All: Gender Inequity in STEM Varies Between Subfields

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 314-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Gisler ◽  
Anne E. Kato ◽  
Soohyun Lee ◽  
Desmond W. Leung
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
Software Engineer ◽  
Gender Disparities ◽  
Stem Fields ◽  
Gender Inequity ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
And Mathematics

We wholeheartedly agree with Miner et al. (2018) that industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists should take a lead in addressing gender inequity in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The focal article is particularly timely in light of the recent controversial “Google memo” (Damore, 2017), in which a senior software engineer endorsed the same individual-level myths regarding the gender gap in STEM that were critiqued by Miner et al. (2018). However, we caution against painting all STEM fields with the same broad brush. We argue that it is critical for I-O psychologists to be aware of important differences between STEM subfields, as these distinctions suggest that a “one-size-fits-all” approach may be inadequate for addressing existing gender disparities in STEM. In order to be maximally effective, interventions may need to emphasize distinct issues and target different points in the career pipeline depending on the specific STEM subfield in question.

scholarly journals The Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gijsbert Stoet ◽  
David C. Geary
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Science Achievement ◽  
Life Quality ◽  
Women In Science ◽  
College Level ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Better Than

The underrepresentation of girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields is a continual concern for social scientists and policymakers. Using an international database on adolescent achievement in science, mathematics, and reading ( N = 472,242), we showed that girls performed similarly to or better than boys in science in two of every three countries, and in nearly all countries, more girls appeared capable of college-level STEM study than had enrolled. Paradoxically, the sex differences in the magnitude of relative academic strengths and pursuit of STEM degrees rose with increases in national gender equality. The gap between boys’ science achievement and girls’ reading achievement relative to their mean academic performance was near universal. These sex differences in academic strengths and attitudes toward science correlated with the STEM graduation gap. A mediation analysis suggested that life-quality pressures in less gender-equal countries promote girls’ and women’s engagement with STEM subjects.

scholarly journals Spotlight on Women of Color in STEM

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catalina Flores
Keyword(s):  
Gender Equality ◽  
Women Of Color ◽  
Stem Fields ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Social Structural ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Attraction And Retention ◽  
Deliberate Effort ◽  
Structural Perspective

The focal article by Miner et al. (2018) convincingly argues that industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology professionals share a responsibility to adopt a social-structural perspective in understanding why women are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. This approach offers the best path forward for explaining the disparity and improving the attraction and retention of women in these fields (Miner et al., 2018). In conjunction with the approach described, a deliberate effort to cast a spotlight on women of color is necessary, as they are the most marginalized, yet are often excluded from conversations about gender equality.

scholarly journals Citation Patterns of Engineering, Statistics, and Computer Science Researchers: An Internal and External Citation Analysis across Multiple Engineering Subfields

2015 ◽  
Vol 76 (7) ◽  
pp. 859-882 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Citation Analysis ◽  
Multidimensional Approach ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Citation Data ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Engineering Statistics ◽  
Academic Settings ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Doctoral Dissertations

This study takes a multidimensional approach to citation analysis, examining citations in multiple subfields of engineering, from both scholarly journals and doctoral dissertations. The three major goals of the study are to determine whether there are differences between citations drawn from dissertations and those drawn from journal articles; to test a methodology incorporating both internal and external citation sources; and to explore the citation habits of researchers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subfields. The results reveal variations in how STEM subfields conduct research in career and academic settings and are more nuanced than internal or external citation data alone can provide. The results have practical collection development implications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document