Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications

Zheng, Xiang; Chen, Jiajing; Yan, Erjia; Ni, Chong

doi:10.1002/asi.24723

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, the scientific publication produc-tivity of female authors in these conditions will be lower than male authors. The results of this study confirm the results published in [42]. In particular, using coarsened exact matching, we show that publications by women are cited less by Wikipedia than expected, and publications by women are less likely to be cited than those by men.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Gender-Related Differences in the Citation Impact of Scientific Publications and Improving the Authors’ Productivity

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article’s purpose is an analysis of the citation impact of scientific publications by authors of different gender compositions. The page method was chosen to calculate the citation impact of scientific publications, and the obtained results allowed to estimate the impact of the scientific publications based on the number of citations. The normalized citation impact is calculated according to nine subsets of scientific publications that correspond to patterns of different gender compositions of authors. Also, these estimates were calculated for each country with which the authors of the publications are affiliated. The Citation database, Network Dataset (Ver. 13), was chosen for the scientometric analysis. The dataset includes more than 5 million scientific publications and 48 million citations. Most of the publications in the dataset are from the STEM field. The results indicate that articles with a predominantly male composition are cited more than articles with a mixed or female composition of authors in this direction. Analysis of advantages in dynamics indicates that in the last decade, in developed countries, there has been a decrease in the connection between the citation impact of scientific publications and the gender composition of their authors. However, the obtained results still confirm the presence of gender inequality in science, which may be related to socioeconomic and cultural characteristics, natural homophily, and other factors that contribute to the appearance of gender gaps. An essential consequence of overcoming these gaps, including in science, is ensuring the rights of people in all their diversity.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Gender-Related Differences in the Citation Impact of Scientific Publications and Improving the Authors’ Productivity

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Linguistic bias in terms of language abstraction and positivity can be observed, along with structural differences in metadata and hypertext links. In addition, citation practices reveal that female authors are cited less than expected, suggesting a preference for citing male publications (Zheng et al ., 2022). These biases may further marginalize female authors, especially in non-Anglophone countries.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing knowledge organization systems from a gender perspective: Wikipedia taxonomy and Wikidata ontologies

Centelles,

Ferran-Ferrer

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeDevelop a comprehensive framework for assessing the knowledge organization systems (KOSs), including the taxonomy of Wikipedia and the ontologies of Wikidata, with a specific focus on enhancing management and retrieval with a gender nonbinary perspective.Design/methodology/approachThis study employs heuristic and inspection methods to assess Wikipedia’s KOS, ensuring compliance with international standards. It evaluates the efficiency of retrieving non-masculine gender-related articles using the Catalan Wikipedian category scheme, identifying limitations. Additionally, a novel assessment of Wikidata ontologies examines their structure and coverage of gender-related properties, comparing them to Wikipedia’s taxonomy for advantages and enhancements.FindingsThis study evaluates Wikipedia’s taxonomy and Wikidata’s ontologies, establishing evaluation criteria for gender-based categorization and exploring their structural effectiveness. The evaluation process suggests that Wikidata ontologies may offer a viable solution to address Wikipedia’s categorization challenges.Originality/valueThe assessment of Wikipedia categories (taxonomy) based on KOS standards leads to the conclusion that there is ample room for improvement, not only in matters concerning gender identity but also in the overall KOS to enhance search and retrieval for users. These findings bear relevance for the design of tools to support information retrieval on knowledge-rich websites, as they assist users in exploring topics and concepts.

show abstract

“…Another study that revealed gender and country-based disparities is Zheng et al (2022). They examined Wikipedia's citation practices and found that women authors are cited less, particularly outside English-speaking countries.…”

Section: Gender Content Gapmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, Wikipedia can be the mirror of society but also, given its influence, it can amplify and deepen its inequalities and imbalances (Miquel-Ribé; Laniado, 2021). Illustrating this amplification, Zheng et al (2022) delves into Wikipedia's citation practices, unearthing disparities in citations to scholarly works linked to particular gender and nationality groups. Notably, women authors receive fewer citations than anticipated, indicating a bias toward citing male-authored publications.…”

Section: The Mirror Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wikipedia gender gap: a scoping review

Ferran-Ferrer,

Boté-Vericad,

Minguillón

2023

EPI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this scoping review, we portray an examination of the gender gap on Wikipedia by analyzing scholarly literature from 2007 to 2022. Employing quantitative methods, the study identifies key author characteristics such as gender, disciplines, countries, and institutions. The research reveals a slight majority of female authors, followed by male authors, with limited representation from non-binary authors. Qualitatively, content analysis uncovers two central themes: addressing the contribution gap and incorporating content related to underrepresented genders. Additionally, the study assesses results on the content gap, editing and participation bias, readership imbalances, and strategies to mitigate the gender gap. Furthermore, it explores the repercussions of this gap and categorizes the contributing factors as “the women’s problem,” “the mirror effect,” and “the systemic problem.” Overall, this comprehensive review enhances our comprehension of the Wikipedia gender gap and provides valuable insights into the research landscape in this domain.

show abstract

Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications

Cited by 9 publications

References 57 publications

Gender-Related Differences in the Citation Impact of Scientific Publications and Improving the Authors’ Productivity

Gender-Related Differences in the Citation Impact of Scientific Publications and Improving the Authors’ Productivity

Assessing knowledge organization systems from a gender perspective: Wikipedia taxonomy and Wikidata ontologies

Wikipedia gender gap: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About