Abstract
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.
Highlights
One is not born, but rather becomes, woman [1]Women have traditionally been, and continue to be, underrepresented in science
How does productivity vary among male and female scientists? Are productivity differences explained by a different success rate or only by the number of trials of each gender? Do men produce higher impact science? Is there a gender bias against women in science that can be evidenced by experimental studies? In an attempt to answer these questions, we quantitatively reviewed 110 studies evaluating gender differences in scientific productivity and their likely causes
The gender productivity gap measured by group representation in scientific evaluation committees was higher than the gap found for articles production ( p 1⁄4 0.005; evaluation committees: Hedges’ d 1⁄4 0.805, o 1⁄4 24, CI 1⁄4 0.718–0.892; articles: Hedges’ d 1⁄4 0.671, o 1⁄4 103, CI 1⁄4 0.623–0.716, figure 2b)
Summary
Even though the percentage of women in science varies across regions, only 28.4% of the research and development employees in the world are female [2]. Women represent 53% of bachelor’s graduates, 43% of PhD graduates and 28% of researchers [2]. This underrepresentation of female scientists can affect the quality and competitiveness of research centres, as ideas from heterogeneous groups are more feasible, effective and innovative [2,6]. Women should have the same opportunities as men to develop and present their own imprinting in the scientific endeavour to contribute to society [2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
