A Tale of Two Sexes

Joëls, Marian; Mason, Carol A.

doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.021

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, we would like to conclude on a positive note: although there is still a long way to go to change the male dominant culture (Holman, Stuart‐Fox, & Hauser, ), there is a rise in awareness of the problem and the situation is slowly improving (Joëls & Mason, ; Figure ). We firmly believe that pursuing the current efforts while bringing men and women together will be the key toward a fairer and more creative research community.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in 2017, the gender pay gap at University College London was 17.5%, close to the national average of 18% (University College London, ); this gap being partly driven by a lower proportion of women in senior roles (only 37% women in the higher quartile pay grade). This evidence illustrates that there are fewer women at senior positions in academia and that they are typically paid less than their male peers (Joëls & Mason, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gender bias in (neuro)science: Facts, consequences, and solutions

Schrouff

Pischedda

Genon

et al. 2019

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 94%

Gender bias in (neuro)science: Facts, consequences, and solutions

Schrouff

Pischedda

Genon

et al. 2019

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Like many scientific disciplines, the field of neuroscience currently faces many structural and social inequities, including marked gender imbalances (22). While the task of addressing these imbalances often depends in part on people in positions of power (e.g., journal editors (21), grant reviewers and agencies (3)(4)(5), department chairs (10)(11)(12), and presidents of scientific societies (20)), many imbalances are caused and perpetuated by researchers at all levels. One example is imbalance within citation practices (15,16).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The extent and drivers of gender imbalance in neuroscience reference lists

Dworkin

Linn

Teich

et al. 2020

Preprint

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Like many scientific disciplines, neuroscience has increasingly attempted to confront pervasive gender imbalances within the field. While much of the conversation has centered around publishing and conference participation, recent research in other fields has called attention to the prevalence of gender bias in citation practices. Because of the downstream effects that citations can have on visibility and career advancement, understanding and eliminating gender bias in citation practices is vital for addressing inequity in a scientific community. In this study, we sought to determine whether there is evidence of gender bias in the citation practices of neuroscientists. Utilizing data from five top neuroscience journals, we indeed find that reference lists tend to include more papers with men as first and last author than would be expected if gender was not a factor in referencing. Importantly, we show that this overcitation of men and undercitation of women is driven largely by the citation practices of men, and is increasing with time despite greater diversity in the academy. We develop a co-authorship network to determine the degree to which homophily in researchers' social networks explains gendered citation practices and we find that men tend to overcite other men even when their social networks are representative of the field. We discuss possible mechanisms and consider how individual researchers might incorporate these findings into their own referencing practices.

show abstract

“…For example, 39% of doctoral graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines in the 28 European Union member states are women, declining to 15% of Grade A (full professor level) and 22% of heads of institute (European Commission 2019). Women are also typically paid less than their male counterparts at each level (Joëls and Mason 2014;European Commission 2019), with an 18% average gender pay-gap in European universities in 2017 (Salinas and Bagni 2017). This pattern is reflected throughout the international scientific community and remains stubbornly unchanged: the issue is clearly not a lack of time for change to propagate (Diezmann and Grieshaber 2019).…”

Section: Is the Playing Field Not Level Now?mentioning

confidence: 99%