Gender differences in animal cognition science

被引:0
作者
Ioanna Gavriilidi
Raoul Van Damme
机构
[1] University of Antwerp,Functional Morphology Lab, Biology Department
[2] National and Kapodistrian University of Athens,Section of Zoology and Marine Biology, Department of Biology
来源
Animal Cognition | 2023年 / 26卷
关键词
Gender bias; Animal cognition; Citation bias; Author gender; Team gender balance;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Women’s representation in science is increasing steadily, with some fields closing gender parity in terms of participation and scientific output. Animal cognition appears to fall into that category. Our current analysis of gender author balance (women versus men) in 600 animal cognition papers supported parity in many aspects, but also revealed some remaining disparities. Women animal cognition scientists often held first authorship positions (58% of the studies), received similar numbers of citations, and published in equally high impact factor journals as men. Women were still under represented in last-author position, which often reflects seniority status (37% of last authors were women). There were interesting results when we considered the gender of teams (of two or more authors): all-women author teams were the minority in our dataset and received on average fewer citations than all men or mixed author teams, regardless of the quality of the journal (as measured by the journal’s impact factor). Women more often focussed on mammals, whereas men more often focussed on fish, both as first authors and as same-gender teams. Men, as first author or in men-only teams, restricted their research more often to organisms of a single sex, compared to women, as first author and as members of a team. Our study suggests that there are many indices of the significant contribution of both women and men scientists in animal cognition, although some gender biases may remain.
引用
收藏
页码:1295 / 1305
页数:10
相关论文
共 277 条
[1]  
Addessi E(2012)Is primatology an equal-opportunity discipline? PLoS ONE 7 e30458-959
[2]  
Borgi M(2021)Fixing the Leaky Pipeline for Talented Women in STEM Int J Sci Math Educ 12 950-794
[3]  
Palagi E(2018)Google scholar and web of science: examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines J Informetr 6 181566-4
[4]  
Almukhambetova A(2019)Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: a meta-analytical review R Soc Open Sci 23 773-572
[5]  
Torrano DH(2020)Factors that contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science careers worldwide: a literature review Soc Psychol Educ 55 1-151
[6]  
Nam A(2018)On the extinction of the single-authored paper: the causes and consequences of increasingly collaborative applied ecological research J Appl Ecol 35 565-129
[7]  
Andersen JP(2011)Sex bias in neuroscience and biomedical research Neurosci Biobehav Rev 70 138-162
[8]  
Nielsen MW(2022)Gender inequalities in research funding: unequal network configurations, or unequal network returns? Soc Netw 17 109-386
[9]  
Astegiano J(2004)Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population Anthrozoös 4 159-3
[10]  
Sebastián-González E(1978)Bias in biological and human sciences: some comments Signs 17 369-23