Early in the pandemic (April 2020) I started what became a long #Twitter thread on #gender #bias in academic #publishing.

Update. New study using #ChatGPT to assess referee reports: "Female first authors received less polite reviews than their male peers… In addition, published papers with a female senior author received more favorable reviews than papers with a male senior author."
https://elifesciences.org/articles/90230

#AI #Bias #Gender #PeerReview

Update. "Between 2015 and 2022, our findings suggests that men [in #Germany, in #economics] tend to seek reputation, while women favor visibility through #OpenAccess, at least at the margin. While authorship in teams can dilute these behavioral patterns, female economists publish more single-authored papers. Overall female researchers appear to contribute more to the public good of open science."
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104874

Summary by one of the co-authors:
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2023/11/23/female-researchers-are-less-influenced-by-journal-prestige-will-it-hold-back-their-careers/

Update. I missed this piece from March 2022: "This research is the first to comprehensively study the 'gender solo research gap' among all internationally visible scientists within a whole national higher education system…The gender solo research gap in #Poland is much weaker than expected: within a more general trend toward team research and international research, gender differences in solo research are much weaker and less relevant than initially assumed."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-022-04308-7

Update. The doctoral dissertations of women are interdisciplinary less often than those of men, and this could "hinder their [women's] career advancement."
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-02392-5

Update. New study: "Merely increasing the proportion of women might not be sufficient to eliminate [gender] bias. Measures accounting for women’s circumstances and needs…and raising editorial awareness to women’s needs may be essential to increasing gender equity and enhancing academic publication."
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0294805

Update. "Citation attributions exhibit gender homophily…that is, gender alignment between citing and cited authors. This pattern greatly disadvantages women in fields where they are underrepresented."
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104895

Summary
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03474-9

Update. From a survey of university faculty in the US: "Males were twice as likely as females to use #AI to recommend journals to which to submit research articles."
https://www.primaryresearch.com/AddCart.aspx?ReportID=790

(Unfortunately the full results are not #OpenAccess and not even close. One copy of the PDF costs $98.)

Update. This qualification applies to all the studies I've collected in this thread: "Different research does not understand the concepts of 'man/woman' and 'male/female' in the same way, and there is no discussion nor written consensus on how to tackle these issues ethically and correctly within #Bibliometrics."
https://digibug.ugr.es/bitstream/handle/10481/88251/Gender1.pdf

Another qualification: Most of these studies determine the sex/gender of authors by using software that makes guesses based on their names.

#Gender

Update. Missed this one from Nov 2017: The #OpenAccess citation advantage (#OACA) is real and it "benefits male and female political scientists at similar rates. Thus, OA negates the gender citation advantage that typically accrues to male political scientists."
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096517000014

#PoliticalScience #SSH

Update. Nature studied its own recent publication record. It found that just 17% of its submissions were from authors who identify as women. Also found a slightly lower acceptance rate for women than for men (8% v 9%). This editorial outlines steps to do better, inc asking authors to self-report their #gender. The journal promises periodic progress reports.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00640-5

Update. "Drawing on the archives of the LSE Impact Blog, this review brings together ten posts that explore the gendered nature of research and scholarly communication."
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2024/03/08/women-academia-and-the-unequal-production-of-knowledge-an-lse-impact-blog-review/

#Gender #ScholComm

Update. In 126 pathology journals, "women made up only 18% of the 141 total editor in chief positions…Among 10 journals with 2 editor in chief positions, 5 had only men and 5 had 1 man and 1 woman. All 3 journals with 3 editor in chief positions had 2 men and 1 woman."
https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqae018

Update. "I [Cary Wu] show that articles written by women receive comparable or even higher rates of citations than articles written by men. However, women tend to accumulate fewer citations over time and at the career level."

* primary source
https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/soc4.13189

* summary
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2024/03/25/why-are-women-cited-less-than-men/

Update. "Women publish less than men, but marriage and family obligations do not generally account for the #gender difference. Married women with children publish as much as their single female colleagues do."
https://doi.org/10.7312/cole21260-017
(#paywalled book chapter)

Update. "Women's contributions [to #OpenSource software projects] tend to be accepted more often than men's. However, when a woman's gender is identifiable, they are rejected more often. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless."
https://peerj.com/preprints/1733v1/

#FOSS #FLOSS #Gender

Update. "Male faculty members typically patented their research two to ten times more often than did their female counterparts, although this rate varied by university and discipline. But when we measured the extent to which the two groups’ scientific publications were cited by patents, we found no statistically significant difference. In other words, female scientists’ work is just as close to the technological frontier."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02081-6

#patents

Update. "We show that dropout rates of #mathematicians after their postdoctoral stage, which used to be higher for women, are converging on similar figures for both genders…[But] a non-negligible number of the prestigious mathematical journals…show a meager representation of women among their authors…and exhibit no signs of turnaround over the last couple of decades."
https://content.ems.press/assets/public/full-texts/books/287/chapters/online-pdf/978-3-98547-573-5-chapter-5727.pdf

#Gender #Mathematics

Update. New study: Our findings show "a significant association between female authorship and the choice of #OpenAccess publishing, indicating a female preference for open access."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-024-05089-x
(#paywalled)

Update. New study: "Women’s representation has been considerably extended in the domain of [anti-doping studies] throughout the last two decades. On average, outputs with female corresponding authors yield a higher average citation score."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-024-05094-0

Update. Missed this one from 2021: "Manuscripts written by women as solo authors or coauthored by women were treated even more favorably by referees and editors. Although there were some differences between fields of research, our findings suggest that peer review and editorial processes do not penalize manuscripts by women."
https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abd0299