scholarly journals Men Set Their Own Cites High: Gender and Self-citation across Fields and over Time

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly M. King ◽  
Carl T. Bergstrom ◽  
Shelley Correll ◽  
Jennifer Jacquet ◽  
Jevin West
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Academic Field ◽  
Women In Academia ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
Gender Specific ◽  
Number Of Authors

How common is self-citation in scholarly publication, and does the practice vary by gender? Using novel methods and a data set of 1.5 million research papers in the scholarly database JSTOR published between 1779 and 2011, the authors find that nearly 10 percent of references are self-citations by a paper’s authors. The findings also show that between 1779 and 2011, men cited their own papers 56 percent more than did women. In the last two decades of data, men self-cited 70 percent more than women. Women are also more than 10 percentage points more likely than men to not cite their own previous work at all. While these patterns could result from differences in the number of papers that men and women authors have published rather than gender-specific patterns of self-citation behavior, this gender gap in self-citation rates has remained stable over the last 50 years, despite increased representation of women in academia. The authors break down self-citation patterns by academic field and number of authors and comment on potential mechanisms behind these observations. These findings have important implications for scholarly visibility and cumulative advantage in academic careers.

scholarly journals Men Set Their Own Cites High: Gender and Self-citation across Fields and over Time

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 237802311773890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly M. King ◽  
Carl T. Bergstrom ◽  
Shelley J. Correll ◽  
Jennifer Jacquet ◽  
Jevin D. West
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Academic Field ◽  
Women In Academia ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
Gender Specific ◽  
Number Of Authors

How common is self-citation in scholarly publication, and does the practice vary by gender? Using novel methods and a data set of 1.5 million research papers in the scholarly database JSTOR published between 1779 and 2011, the authors find that nearly 10 percent of references are self-citations by a paper’s authors. The findings also show that between 1779 and 2011, men cited their own papers 56 percent more than did women. In the last two decades of data, men self-cited 70 percent more than women. Women are also more than 10 percentage points more likely than men to not cite their own previous work at all. While these patterns could result from differences in the number of papers that men and women authors have published rather than gender-specific patterns of self-citation behavior, this gender gap in self-citation rates has remained stable over the last 50 years, despite increased representation of women in academia. The authors break down self-citation patterns by academic field and number of authors and comment on potential mechanisms behind these observations. These findings have important implications for scholarly visibility and cumulative advantage in academic careers.

scholarly journals Do Women Get Fewer Votes? No.

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 201-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Semra Sevi ◽  
Vincent Arel-Bundock ◽  
André Blais
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Time Trends ◽  
Large Data ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Women Candidates ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
The Difference

AbstractWe study data on the gender of more than 21,000 unique candidates in all Canadian federal elections since 1921, when the first women ran for seats in Parliament. This large data set allows us to compute precise estimates of the difference in the electoral fortunes of men and women candidates. When accounting for party effects and time trends, we find that the difference between the vote shares of men and women is substantively negligible (±0.5 percentage point). This gender gap was larger in the 1920s (±2.5 percentage points), but it is now statistically indistinguishable from zero. Our results have important normative implications: political parties should recruit and promote more women candidates because they remain underrepresented in Canadian politics and because they do not suffer from a substantial electoral penalty.

scholarly journals Are Papers Written by Women Authors Cited Less Frequently?

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Esarey ◽  
Kristin Bryant
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Spurious Correlation ◽  
Female Author ◽  
Publishing Journal ◽  
Number Of Authors

Dion, Sumner, and Mitchell (2018) find that a published article is more likely to cite at least one female-authored paper if that article is itself authored by women. To complement their work, we study the number of times that an article in their data set is cited given that it has at least one female author. We find that articles with at least one female author are cited no more or less often than male-authored articles once we control for the publishing journal and the number of authors. The importance of controlling for author count in our model suggests that spurious correlation and/or self-citation might explain at least some of the gender differences found by Dion, Sumner, and Mitchell (2018).

scholarly journals SDG 5 and the Gender Gap in Standardization: Empirical Evidence From Germany

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (20) ◽  
pp. 8699
Author(s):  
Philipp Heß
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Geographical Location ◽  
Women In Science ◽  
Female Representation ◽  
Leadership Positions ◽  
Technical Standards ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Engineering Mathematics

Whereas (technical) standards often affect society as a whole, they are mostly developed by men. In the context of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 5 (gender equality), this article motivates research on the gender gap in standardization, focusing in a first step on the under-representation of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and leadership positions as one possible cause. A novel data set of more than 8000 organizations that develop formal standards and 28,000 affiliated experts (10.5% female) confirms that women are descriptively under-represented. A logistic regression shows that organizations’ size, industry, and geographical location are significant factors that are associated with representation by female standardizers. Standard-development for construction, mechanical and electrical engineering is especially male-dominated, while the east of Germany shows more female representation than the west. The presented empirical evidence of female under-representation suggests a need for standard-setting organizations to expand their focus from considering gender in standards documents to actively promoting female participation in their committees. It further adds to the debate on stakeholder representation in standardization and its legitimacy as a co-regulative system in the EU.

scholarly journals Are we reaching gender parity among Palaeontology authors?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Giles ◽  
Rachel Warnock ◽  
Emma Dunne ◽  
Erin Saupe ◽  
Laura Soul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Gender Parity ◽  
The Past ◽  
Diversity Issues ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Made In ◽  
Number Of Authors

<p>Women remain underrepresented in almost all areas of STEM, especially at senior levels, with palaeontology being no exception. There is a widespread perception that the situation is improving, and that it is simply a matter of time before this improvement is reflected at higher career stages. However, there is strong evidence that formidable barriers remain for women in palaeontology. We must question how much progress towards gender equality has been made in order to continue on a path towards equity. With a view to contributing quantitative data to this discussion, we examine whether the proportion of women publishing in palaeontology is approaching parity, using data from the journal <em>Palaeontology</em> as a proxy for the discipline. This work was motivated by the sense that, despite increased representation of women, articles on palaeontological subjects almost never appear to have over 50% women authors. Indeed, we find that women account for less than 20% of authors and, perhaps more surprisingly, there has been no substantial increase in the proportion of women contributing to the journal over the past 20 years. The percentage of articles in which women make up more than 50% of authors remains unchanged. The proportion of articles on which women are absent from the author list is decreasing, but this partly reflects an increase in the average number of authors per article. Our findings match those found in broader studies of the scientific literature, including those within the biological and Earth Sciences, which generally find that women make up less than 30% of authors. We highlight important barriers that remain for women and other under-represented groups in science, and make several recommendations to help improve their representation in palaeontology. Key recommendations include: acknowledging and engaging with diversity issues; targeted recruitment of women to all levels of academic publishing; actively promoting individuals from all underrepresented groups, especially those at the intersections of multiple minoritized identities; and collecting relevant data and perspectives.</p>

Abstract 14171: Association of Women Authors With Women Enrollment in the Clinical Trials of Atrial Fibrillation

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Safi U Khan ◽  
Muhammad Z KHAN ◽  
Ahmad N Lone ◽  
Chraumathi Raghu Subramanian ◽  
Swapna Talluri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Multivariate Model ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Independent Variable ◽  
Number Of Authors

Introduction: Women with atrial fibrillation (AF) are more symptomatic, have poorer quality of life and carry a higher risk of stroke than men. Despite this woman have been underrepresented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AF. Hypothesis: Women representation in the author panel might influence enrollment of women in RCTs of AF. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search from 1989 through December 2019 to identify RCTs of AF with a follow-up duration of ≥3 months. The multivariate linear regression model was constructed with the proportion of women enrollment in the RCTs as the dependent variable and the proportion of women in the author panel as a key independent variable. The model was adjusted for publication year, region, sponsor, and type of RCTs (invasive or medical treatment). Results: A total of 134 RCTs (n=149,162) were included. The median number of participants per trial was 205 (IQR, 74-676). The median number of women per trial was 71 (IQR, 27-218). The overall representation of women was 35.1% (95% CI, 32.6-37.6%), which did not improve between 1989 to 2019 (from 27.3% to 29.6%; P=0.10). RCTs of AF were authored by 1,568 authors. The median number of authors per trial publication was 10 (IQR, 7-10). The median number of women authors was 1 (IQR, 0-3). First (93%) and senior (92%) authors were predominantly men. Only 13.3% (n=18) of publications had women as first or senior authors, which did not improve over time (P=0.07). Multivariate model showed that each 1% increase in women in the author panel was associated with 19% increase in women enrollment in RCTs (P=0.02) (Table). Conclusions: Women remained underrepresented both as participants and as authors of RCTs of AF. Higher representation of women in the author panel was associated with higher enrollment of women in RCTs of AF. Efforts to recruitment and retain women AF investigators may be a critical mechanism to help lessen the disparities in both areas.

Gender Disparities in the Author Bylines of Articles Published in Clinical Neuropsychology Journals from 1985 to 2019

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anastasia Matchanova ◽  
Michelle A. Babicz ◽  
Jennifer L. Thompson ◽  
Briana Johnson ◽  
Irene J. Ke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gender Bias ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Women In Leadership ◽  
Gender Disparities ◽  
Leadership Roles ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Clinical Neuropsychology ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Female Authorship ◽  
Child Neuropsychology

Objective: Women are becoming more prevalent in clinical neuropsychology, but gender bias and disparities persist across multiple professional domains. This study examined potential gender disparities in historical authorship trends across commonly read journals in clinical neuropsychology. Method: Analyses were conducted on 10,531 articles published in six clinical neuropsychology journals from 1985 to 2019. Each author was coded as either a man or a woman using the OpenGenderTracking Project database. Results: On average, women comprised 43.3% ( 30.6) of the authors listed in clinical neuropsychology article bylines and were lead and/or corresponding author on 50.3% of these papers. Findings varied by journal, with Child Neuropsychology having the best representation of women across several study metrics. Women comprised an increasing proportion of authors over time and the gender gap in clinical neuropsychology is smaller than was recently reported for the broader field of psychology; nevertheless, the recent rates of female authorship lag behind the prevalence of women in clinical neuropsychology. Encouragingly, gender was not associated with the number of times an article was cited. Articles that included women in leadership roles had significantly more authors overall and specifically more women authors. Conclusions: Women are under-represented as authors in clinical neuropsychology journals, but they are becoming more common and their papers are cited just as frequently as their male colleagues. Efforts to increase women as research mentors and sponsors may help to further close the publishing gender gap in clinical neuropsychology.

Women authorship in library and information science journals from 1981 to 2020: Is equitable representation being attained?

2021 ◽  
pp. 016555152110500
Author(s):  
Brady Lund ◽  
Amrollah Shamsi
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Library Science ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Women Authors ◽  
Significant Growth ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Trends Over Time ◽  
Over Time

This study examines the proportion of women as first authors in major library and information science (LIS) journals over the years 1981–2020. Author name and year data were collected for 10 LIS journals – five that are associated more with library topics and five with information science topics – and analysed using the genderize.io tool. Both general trends over time and comparisons of information science versus library science journals are presented. The findings indicate significant growth in the proportion of women authors among the LIS journals, but primarily concentrated only among the library science journals, with information science journals falling well behind. Representation of women authors (~60%) still lags well below the overall representation of women in librarianship (~80%). These findings suggest that there is still considerable growth needed to decrease the gender gap among authorship in top LIS journals.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document