Is there a gender difference in scientific collaboration? A scientometric examination of co-authorships among industrial-organizational psychologists

被引:38
|
作者
Fell, Clemens B. [1 ]
Koenig, Cornelius J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Saarland, Fachrichtung Psychol, Campus A1 3, D-66123 Saarbrucken, Germany
关键词
Gender differences; Collaboration; Research productivity; Scientific productivity; Impact; Networking; EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE; IMPACT FACTOR; PATTERNS; NETWORKS; WOMEN; PRODUCTIVITY; PERSONALITY; STRATEGIES; PUBLISH; WORK;
D O I
10.1007/s11192-016-1967-5
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
In modern knowledge societies, scientific research is crucial, but expensive and often publicly financed. However, with regard to scientific research success, some studies have found gender differences in favor of men. To explain this, it has been argued that female researchers collaborate less than male researchers, and the current study examines this argument scientometrically. A secondary data analysis was applied to the sample of a recent scientometric publication (Konig et al. in Scientometrics 105:1931-1952, 2015. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1646-y). The sample comprised 4234 (45 % female) industrial-organizational psychologists with their 46,656 publications (published from 1948 to 2013) and all of their approx. 100,000 algorithmically genderized collaborators (i.e., co-authors). Findings confirmed that (a) the majority of researchers' publications resulted from collaborations, and (b) their engagement in collaborations was related to their scientific success, although not as clearly as expected (and partly even negatively). However, there was no evidence that a lack of female collaboration causes females' lower scientific success. In fact, female researchers engage in more scientific collaborations. Our findings have important implications for science and society because they make gender differences in scientific success much harder to rationalize.
引用
收藏
页码:113 / 141
页数:29
相关论文
共 5 条
  • [1] Is there a gender difference in scientific collaboration? A scientometric examination of co-authorships among industrial–organizational psychologists
    Clemens B. Fell
    Cornelius J. König
    [J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 108 : 113 - 141
  • [2] Analysis of the evolution of scientific collaboration networks for the prediction of new co-authorships
    Affonso, Felipe
    Santiago, Monique de Oliveira
    Rodrigues Dias, Thiago Magela
    [J]. TRANSINFORMACAO, 2022, 34
  • [3] Online graduate programs: Better equity for industrial-organizational psychologists among disadvantaged groups
    Lapine, Caitlin M.
    Sachdev, Aditi R.
    [J]. INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2022, 15 (02): : 208 - 211
  • [4] Scientific impact of Chilean-based animal behavioralists is positively associated with co-authorships from developed countries, high impact factor journals, but not with gender
    Ebensperger, Luis A.
    Aspillaga-Cid, Antonia
    Labra, Antonieta
    [J]. REVISTA CHILENA DE HISTORIA NATURAL, 2023, 96 (01)
  • [5] Scientific impact of Chilean-based animal behavioralists is positively associated with co-authorships from developed countries, high impact factor journals, but not with gender
    Luis A. Ebensperger
    Antonia Aspillaga-Cid
    Antonieta Labra
    [J]. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 96