Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review
- Autores
- Astegiano, Julia; Sebastián-González, Esther; Castanho, Camila De Toledo
- Año de publicación
- 2019
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers´ work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men´s success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men´s articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science.
Fil: Astegiano, Julia. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina
Fil: Sebastián-González, Esther. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; España
Fil: Castanho, Camila De Toledo. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; Brasil - Materia
-
GENDER BIAS
H-INDEX
SCIENCE IMPACT
SUCCESS RATE
WOMEN IN SCIENCE
WOMEN UNDERREPRESENTATION - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/114809
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_88bd2d20e66187037a71747d70b4517f |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/114809 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical reviewAstegiano, JuliaSebastián-González, EstherCastanho, Camila De ToledoGENDER BIASH-INDEXSCIENCE IMPACTSUCCESS RATEWOMEN IN SCIENCEWOMEN UNDERREPRESENTATIONhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.4https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers´ work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men´s success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men´s articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science.Fil: Astegiano, Julia. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Sebastián-González, Esther. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; EspañaFil: Castanho, Camila De Toledo. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; BrasilThe Royal Society2019-06info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/114809Astegiano, Julia; Sebastián-González, Esther; Castanho, Camila De Toledo; Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review; The Royal Society; Royal Society Open Science; 6; 6; 6-2019; 1-122054-5703CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1098/rsos.181566info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.181566info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:51:31Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/114809instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:51:31.787CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
title |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
spellingShingle |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review Astegiano, Julia GENDER BIAS H-INDEX SCIENCE IMPACT SUCCESS RATE WOMEN IN SCIENCE WOMEN UNDERREPRESENTATION |
title_short |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
title_full |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
title_fullStr |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
title_full_unstemmed |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
title_sort |
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Astegiano, Julia Sebastián-González, Esther Castanho, Camila De Toledo |
author |
Astegiano, Julia |
author_facet |
Astegiano, Julia Sebastián-González, Esther Castanho, Camila De Toledo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Sebastián-González, Esther Castanho, Camila De Toledo |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
GENDER BIAS H-INDEX SCIENCE IMPACT SUCCESS RATE WOMEN IN SCIENCE WOMEN UNDERREPRESENTATION |
topic |
GENDER BIAS H-INDEX SCIENCE IMPACT SUCCESS RATE WOMEN IN SCIENCE WOMEN UNDERREPRESENTATION |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.4 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers´ work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men´s success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men´s articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science. Fil: Astegiano, Julia. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Sebastián-González, Esther. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; España Fil: Castanho, Camila De Toledo. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; Brasil |
description |
Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers´ work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men´s success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men´s articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-06 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/114809 Astegiano, Julia; Sebastián-González, Esther; Castanho, Camila De Toledo; Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review; The Royal Society; Royal Society Open Science; 6; 6; 6-2019; 1-12 2054-5703 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/114809 |
identifier_str_mv |
Astegiano, Julia; Sebastián-González, Esther; Castanho, Camila De Toledo; Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: A meta-analytical review; The Royal Society; Royal Society Open Science; 6; 6; 6-2019; 1-12 2054-5703 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1098/rsos.181566 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.181566 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
The Royal Society |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
The Royal Society |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844613583990685696 |
score |
13.070432 |