Early in the pandemic (April 2020) I started what became a long #Twitter thread on #gender #bias in academic #publishing.
-
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.pdfAnother qualification: Most of these studies determine the sex/gender of authors by using software that makes guesses based on their names.
-
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.pdfAnother qualification: Most of these studies determine the sex/gender of authors by using software that makes guesses based on their names.
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 -
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/S1049096517000014Update. 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. 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/d41586-024-00640-5Update. "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/ -
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/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. 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/aqae018Update. "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. "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 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/ -
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/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 -
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/d41586-024-02081-6Update. "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 -
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.pdfUpdate. 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: 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. 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/s11192-024-05094-0Update. 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 -
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.abd0299Update. Missed this one from 2020: "The last three years of reported data all show women leading men in representation in #law schools in the US. This past academic year, however, ushered in a new first: women leading the masthead of each top law journal."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erinspencer1/2020/02/11/first-all-women-class-of-top-law-journal-editors-leaves-behind-a-byline-and-legacy/h/t #ArthurBoston
-
Update. Missed this one from 2020: "The last three years of reported data all show women leading men in representation in #law schools in the US. This past academic year, however, ushered in a new first: women leading the masthead of each top law journal."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erinspencer1/2020/02/11/first-all-women-class-of-top-law-journal-editors-leaves-behind-a-byline-and-legacy/h/t #ArthurBoston
Update. Our data show "promising advancements towards gender equity [in academic publishing]…These findings challenge an initial perception of male prolificacy. The positive trends extend to female-led research teams, highlighting a correlation between gender balance and leadership…Contrary to conventional assumptions, developing countries are exhibiting a pronounced evolution in female authorship rates."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157724000695 -
Update. Our data show "promising advancements towards gender equity [in academic publishing]…These findings challenge an initial perception of male prolificacy. The positive trends extend to female-led research teams, highlighting a correlation between gender balance and leadership…Contrary to conventional assumptions, developing countries are exhibiting a pronounced evolution in female authorship rates."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157724000695Update. Most journals of radiology (60.3%) fail to meet even one of the #SAGER (Sex and Gender Equity in Research) criteria. However, those that did had higher journal impact factors.
https://www.ejradiology.com/article/S0720-048X(24)00344-9/fulltext -
Update. The journal 𝘎𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 & 𝘚𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘺 is calling for submissions on "the relationship between feminism, metascience, and open science."
https://drive.google.com/file/d/181MycZzTQ5iuHfbbpuDOE59Y-UKejLGD/view -
Update. The journal 𝘎𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 & 𝘚𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘺 is calling for submissions on "the relationship between feminism, metascience, and open science."
https://drive.google.com/file/d/181MycZzTQ5iuHfbbpuDOE59Y-UKejLGD/viewUpdate. In the humanities, in the period 2000-2014, "male academics published 2917 books (averaging 3.41 books) and the 760 female faculty members published 1918 books (averaging 2.52 books), indicating “gender disparity” in scholarly publishing."
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-66170-9_3
(#paywalled) -
Update. In the humanities, in the period 2000-2014, "male academics published 2917 books (averaging 3.41 books) and the 760 female faculty members published 1918 books (averaging 2.52 books), indicating “gender disparity” in scholarly publishing."
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-66170-9_3
(#paywalled)Update. In the field of medical informatics, "only 25% (8/32) of the EiCs [editors in chief]… are female, while females only represent 32.7% (426/1303) of the EB [editorial board] members across journals."
https://ebooks.iospress.nl/doi/10.3233/SHTI240364 -
Update. In the field of medical informatics, "only 25% (8/32) of the EiCs [editors in chief]… are female, while females only represent 32.7% (426/1303) of the EB [editorial board] members across journals."
https://ebooks.iospress.nl/doi/10.3233/SHTI240364Update. "Our results indicate that the ratio of female to male authors keeps increasing steadily across disciplines. The increases are field-neutral —in other words, they are not bigger, for example, in [STEM fields]…The increases are… decelerating in time, which could suggest that the equilibrium of female to male authors may be plateauing. Finally, although the within-field gender gap is decreasing, it actually widened between fields."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/08944393241270633
