Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia
- PMID: 38096215
- PMCID: PMC10720991
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293080
Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia
Abstract
Gender disparities in science have become a salient concern for policy makers and researchers. Previous studies have documented a gender gap in research productivity and recognition in the sciences, and different reasons for this gap have been proposed. In this study, we examine four academic fields with different proportions of men and women in their population. We address the following questions: What is the relationship between the gendered make-up of a field and the productivity and recognition of men and women scientists in that academic field? What is the relationship between the publication patterns of men and women in different academic fields and their productivity and recognition? We find that gendered patterns of productivity and recognition favour men in man-dominated subfields (Mathematical Physics and Software Engineering), while women were more productive and highly cited in one woman-dominated subfield (Nursing), though not in another (Psychology). Nursing, a woman-gendered field, provides an interesting counterpoint to the most usual findings regarding gender disparities in academia. Our findings highlight the need to disaggregate academic fields and to bring to the forefront other disciplines that remain under investigated in analyses of gender gaps to potentially elucidate conflicting findings in the literature.
Copyright: © 2023 Sá et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Similar articles
-
Women in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape.Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2014 Dec;15(3):75-141. doi: 10.1177/1529100614541236. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2014. PMID: 26172066
-
Gender productivity gap among star performers in STEM and other scientific fields.J Appl Psychol. 2018 Dec;103(12):1283-1306. doi: 10.1037/apl0000331. Epub 2018 Jul 19. J Appl Psychol. 2018. PMID: 30024197
-
Gender disparities in research productivity among 9952 academic physicians.Laryngoscope. 2013 Aug;123(8):1865-75. doi: 10.1002/lary.24039. Epub 2013 Apr 8. Laryngoscope. 2013. PMID: 23568709
-
U.S. Women Faculty in the Social Sciences Also Face Gender Inequalities.Front Psychol. 2022 May 26;13:792756. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.792756. eCollection 2022. Front Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35693519 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others?Psychol Bull. 2017 Jan;143(1):1-35. doi: 10.1037/bul0000052. Epub 2016 Oct 10. Psychol Bull. 2017. PMID: 27732018 Review.
Cited by
-
Social media in advancing equity and collaboration in rheumatology: the CORDIALITY review.RMD Open. 2025 Mar 27;11(1):e005490. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2025-005490. RMD Open. 2025. PMID: 40154563 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Gender differences in the Italian academic landscape: Examining inequalities within the medical area in the last decade.PLoS One. 2025 Jul 23;20(7):e0325705. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325705. eCollection 2025. PLoS One. 2025. PMID: 40700349 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Bentley JT. Gender differences in the careers of academic scientists and engineers: A literature review: National Science Foundation; 2003.
-
- Investing in Canada’s future: Strengthening the foundations of Canadian research. Advisory Panel on Federal Support for Fundamental Science; 2017.
-
- Report to the Minister of Industry of the Ad Hoc Panel on CERC Gender Issues—Plans and reports. In: Go Canada, editor.: Government of Canada; 2010.
-
- European.Commission. Advancing gender equality in research and innovation. 2019.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous