Understated gender disparities due to outcome-dependent selection: Commentary on Mackelprang et al. (2023).

Loh, Wen Wei; Ren, Dongning

doi:10.1037/amp0001167

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Supplemental Table S2). Last, it has recently been noted that focusing on papers that have already been published could underestimate gender biases via "outcome-dependent selection" (Loh & Ren, 2023), which could be addressed if journals analyze their submissions data in a manner that protect author identity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As our three datasheets were unbalanced for the total number of publications, there are differences in statistical power, with narrower confidence intervals for the nongambling addictions papers and PubMed papers that may alter certain conclusions (e.g., evidence for gender parity in Table 2 vs. ). Last, it has recently been noted that focusing on papers that have already been published could underestimate gender biases via “outcome-dependent selection” (Loh & Ren, 2023), which could be addressed if journals analyze their submissions data in a manner that protect author identity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gender gaps in publications and citations in gambling studies: Comparisons against addiction science.

Sinclair,

Clark

2024

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Women in academia publish fewer papers and receive fewer citations than men. These gender gaps likely reflect systemic biases operating over several levels, from journal editorial policies to academic career progression. This study sought to characterize gender gaps for publications and citations in the field of gambling studies. Method: An automated gender inference procedure classified authors' binarized gender from their first names. Gender gaps were computed for publications and citations of papers in gambling studies, using the wider field of addiction science as a benchmark. Publication data were scraped from eight peer-reviewed gambling/addictions journals and separately from all gambling publications listed in PubMed. Results: Men authored 16% more publications than women among gambling papers and 23% more publications among nongambling addictions papers. Although robust gender gaps were observed in specialist gambling journals, we find limited overall evidence for gender inequality being greater in gambling studies. Indeed, among nongambling addiction papers, men published more, despite a greater apparent representation of women in the field. The gender gap was most pronounced for the last authorships, denoting seniority. Among the first authorships, there was variability between journals, and some journals displayed approximate parity. There was limited evidence for any corresponding gender gap in citation counts. Conclusions: Gender gaps in gambling research, and addiction science more broadly, adhere to wider trends in academia, including the associations with academic seniority. Variability between individual journals supports the role of journal editorial policies to increase the representation and visibility of women researchers in addiction science. Public Health Significance StatementWe characterize gender biases in publishing associated with academic seniority in the field of gambling studies, against a benchmark of papers from addiction science. Journal editorial policies should strive to increase the representation and visibility of women researchers in addiction science.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender gaps in publications and citations in gambling studies: Comparisons against addiction science.

Sinclair,

Clark

2024

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…How does a person's race affect the person's chances of accessing health care? These are important research questions in diversity science but require different conceptual (see e.g., Vander-Weele & Hernán, 2012) and methodological (see e.g., Loh & Ren, 2023b) considerations beyond the context of this article.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Incremental Propensity Score Approach for Diversity Science

Loh,

Ren

2024

Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Addressing core questions in diversity science requires quantifying causal effects (e.g., what drives social inequities and how to reduce them). Conventional approaches target the average causal effect (ACE), but ACE-based analyses suffer from limitations that undermine their relevance for diversity science. In this article, we introduce a novel alternative from the causal inference literature: the so-called incremental propensity score (IPS). First, we explain why the IPS is well suited for investigating core queries in diversity science. Unlike the ACE, the IPS does not demand conceptualizing unrealistic counterfactual scenarios in which everyone in the population is uniformly exposed versus unexposed to a causal factor. Instead, the IPS focuses on the effect of hypothetically shifting individuals’ chances of being exposed along a continuum. This allows seeing how the effect may be graded, offering a more realistic and policy-relevant quantification of the causal effect than a single ACE estimate. Moreover, the IPS does not require the positivity assumption, a necessary condition for estimating the ACE but which rarely holds in practice. Next, to broaden accessibility, we provide a step-by-step guide on estimating the IPS using R, a free and popular software. Finally, we illustrate the IPS using two real-world examples. The current article contributes to the methodological advancement in diversity science and offers researchers a more realistic, relevant, and meaningful approach.

show abstract

Understated gender disparities due to outcome-dependent selection: Commentary on Mackelprang et al. (2023).

Cited by 2 publications

References 7 publications

Gender gaps in publications and citations in gambling studies: Comparisons against addiction science.

Gender gaps in publications and citations in gambling studies: Comparisons against addiction science.

The Incremental Propensity Score Approach for Diversity Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About