Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Do gendered citation advantages influence field participation? Four unusual fields in the USA 1996–2017

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gender inequalities in science are an ongoing concern, but their current causes are not well understood. This article investigates four fields with unusual proportions of female researchers in the USA for their subject matter, according to some current theories. It assesses how their gender composition and gender differences in citation rates have changed over time. All fields increased their share of female first-authored research, but at varying rates. The results give no evidence of the importance of citations, despite their unusual gender characteristics. For example, the field with the highest share of female-authored research and the most rapid increase had the largest male citation advantage. Differing micro-specialisms seems more likely than bias to be a cause of gender differences in citation rates, when present.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  • AAMC. (2017). More women than men enrolled in U.S. medical schools in 2017. https://news.aamc.org/press-releases/article/applicant-enrollment-2017/. Accessed 28 September 2018.

  • Antunovic, D. (2017). “Just another story” sports journalists’ memories of title IX and women’s sport. Communication & Sport, 5(2), 205–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AVMC. (2017). Annual Data Report 2016–2017. Washington, DC: Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges. http://www.aavmc.org/data/files/data/2017%20aavmc%20public%20data-%20final.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2018.

  • Beldecos, A., Bailey, S., Gilbert, S., Hicks, K., Kenschaft, L., Niemczyk, N., et al. (1988). The importance of feminist critique for contemporary cell biology. Hypatia, 3(1), 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 57, 289–300.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Berk, R. A., Western, B., & Weiss, R. E. (1995). Statistical inference for apparent populations. Sociological Methodology, 25, 421–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonham, K. S., & Stefan, M. I. (2017). Women are underrepresented in computational biology: An analysis of the scholarly literature in biology, computer science and computational biology. PLoS Computational Biology, 13(10), e1005134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. L., Helitzer, D., Freund, K., Westring, A., McGee, R., Campbell, P. B., et al. (2018). A summary report from the research partnership on women in science careers. Journal of General Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4547-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(8), 3157–3162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, E. S., Crippa, F., Calderari, T., & Prato-Previde, E. (2017). Empathy toward animals and people: The role of gender and length of service in a sample of Italian veterinarians. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 17(1), 32–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooky, C., Messner, M. A., & Musto, M. (2015). “It’s dude time!” A quarter century of excluding women’s sports in televised news and highlight shows. Communication & Sport, 3(3), 261–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1051–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Steinberg, M. (2013). Navigating social roles in pursuit of important goals: A communal goal congruity account of STEM pursuits. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(7), 487–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Steinberg, M., Brown, E. R., Belanger, A. L., & Clark, E. K. (2017). A goal congruity model of role entry, engagement, and exit: Understanding communal goal processes in STEM gender gaps. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(2), 142–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, W. W., Murray, F., & Stuart, T. E. (2006). Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences. Science, 313(5787), 665–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecklund, E. H., Lincoln, A. E., & Tansey, C. (2012). Gender segregation in elite academic science. Gender & Society, 26(5), 693–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsevier. (2017). Gender in the global research landscape. Retrieved from: https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/265661/ElsevierGenderReport_final_for-web.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2018.

  • Figueiredo, J. F., Rodrigues, L. M., Troncon, L. E., & Cianflone, A. R. (1997). Influence of gender on specialty choices in a Brazilian medical school. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 72(1), 68–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnas, H. J., Garza, R. M., Li, A. Y., Johnson, D. J., Bajaj, A. K., Kalliainen, L. K., et al. (2018). Gender differences in the professional and personal lives of plastic surgeons. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 142(1), 252–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hengel, E. (2018). Publishing while female. Technical report. University of Liverpool. http://www.erinhengel.com/research/publishing_female.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2018.

  • Holman, L., Stuart-Fox, D., & Hauser, C. E. (2018). The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented? PLoS Biology, 16(4), e2004956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irvine, L., & Vermilya, J. R. (2010). Gender work in a feminized profession: The case of veterinary medicine. Gender & Society, 24(1), 56–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, M. M., Bergstrom, C. T., Correll, S. J., Jacquet, J., & West, J. D. (2017). Men set their own cites high: Gender and self-citation across fields and over time. Socius, 3, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023117738903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ku, M. C. (2011). When does gender matter? Gender differences in specialty choice among physicians. Work and Occupations, 38(2), 221–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Desrochers, N., Macaluso, B., Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2016). Contributorship and division of labor in knowledge production. Social Studies of Science, 46(3), 417–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Global gender disparities in science. Nature, 504(7479), 211–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2017). The end of gender disparities in science? If only it were true… https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2z294. Accessed 28 September 2018.

  • Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Alphabetization and the skewing of first authorship towards last names early in the alphabet. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 575–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lofstedt, J. (2003). Gender and veterinary medicine. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 44(7), 533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P. (2012). Managing pet owners’ guilt and grief in veterinary euthanasia encounters. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 41(3), 337–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moulton, C. A., Seemann, N., & Webster, F. (2013). It’s all about gender, or is it? Medical Education, 47(6), 538–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nkenke, E., Seemann, R., Vairaktaris, E., Schaller, H. G., Rohde, M., Stelzle, F., et al. (2015). Gender trends in authorship in oral and maxillofacial surgery literature: A 30-year analysis. Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery, 43(6), 913–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okike, K., Liu, B., Lin, Y. B., Torpey, J. L., Kocher, M. S., Mehlman, C. T., et al. (2012). The orthopedic gender gap: Trends in authorship and editorial board representation over the past 4 decades. American Journal of Orthopedics, 41(7), 304–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Othman, M., & Latih, R. (2006). Women in computer science: No shortage here! Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 111–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanfey, H., Crandall, M., Shaughnessy, E., Stein, S. L., Cochran, A., Parangi, S., et al. (2017). Strategies for identifying and closing the gender salary gap in surgery. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 225(2), 333–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroen, A. T., Brownstein, M. R., & Sheldon, G. F. (2004). Women in academic general surgery. Academic Medicine, 79(4), 310–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schull, V., Shaw, S., & Kihl, L. A. (2013). “If A Woman Came In… She Would Have Been Eaten Up Alive” analyzing gendered political processes in the search for an athletic director. Gender & Society, 27(1), 56–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, J. K., Slocum, C. S., Bank, A. M., Bhatnagar, S., Blauwet, C. A., Poorman, J. A., et al. (2017). Where are the women? The underrepresentation of women physicians among recognition award recipients from medical specialty societies. PM&R, 9(8), 804–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Doerr, L. (2004). Women’s work: Gender equality vs. hierarchy in the life sciences. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Su, R., & Rounds, J. (2015). All STEM fields are not created equal: People and things interests explain gender disparities across STEM fields. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 189. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, R., Rounds, J., & Armstrong, P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135(6), 859–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tellhed, U., Bäckström, M., & Björklund, F. (2017). Will I fit in and do well? The importance of social belongingness and self-efficacy for explaining gender differences in interest in STEM and HEED majors. Sex Roles, 77(1–2), 86–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2018). Do females create higher impact research? Scopus citations and Mendeley readers for articles from five countries. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1031–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M., & Fairclough, R. (2015). Geometric journal impact factors correcting for individual highly cited articles. Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 263–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. (2016). Sports medicine: A career for all genders? Journal of Sports Medicine Blog. https://cjsmblog.com/2016/06/16/sports-medicine-a-career-for-all-genders/. Accessed 28 September 2018.

  • Valsangkar, N. P., Zimmers, T. A., Kim, B. J., Blanton, C., Joshi, M. M., Bell, T. M., et al. (2015). Determining the drivers of academic success in surgery: An analysis of 3,850 faculty. PLoS ONE, 10(7), e0131678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, F., Rice, K., Christian, J., Seemann, N., Baxter, N., Moulton, C., et al. (2016). The erasure of gender in academic surgery: A qualitative study. The American Journal of Surgery, 212(4), 559–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitt, M. (2012). The journal impact factor: Angel, devil, or scapegoat? A comment on JK Vanclay’s article 2011. Scientometrics, 92(2), 485–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Wolverhampton, Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton, WV1 1LY, UK

    Mike Thelwall

Authors
  1. Mike Thelwall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mike Thelwall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thelwall, M. Do gendered citation advantages influence field participation? Four unusual fields in the USA 1996–2017. Scientometrics 117, 2133–2144 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2926-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2926-0

Keywords