267 research outputs found
Gender Differences in Recognition of Coauthored Research: Evidence from the Italian Academia
I use data from Italian National Qualification evaluations to analyse whether women and men re-ceive differential credit for their coauthored work. National-level committees assess applicants' research quality, and a positive assessment is a requirement for promotion to associate and full professorship in Italian universities.
I find that, conditional on the candidates’ individual characteristics and publications’ average qual-ity, the returns to an extra last- and middle-authored publication are, respectively, 35% and over 50% lower for women. On the other hand, I find no gender differences in the returns to single- and first-authored publications.
The evidence is consistent with the possibility that women are evaluated differently from men in the presence of information asymmetries and stereotypes. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that gender differences in the attribution of credit for coauthored work emerge only in applications for associate professorship, where information asymmetries are larger. Moreover, stereotypes in science seem to penalise women when they undertake leadership roles as heads of labs, as women appear to suffer a last-authorship penalty in STEMM fields (sci-ence, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine).
Additionally, using data on all publications in the Italian academia from the past twenty years, I explore whether observed coauthorship patterns are consistent with the possibility that women anticipate a coauthorship disadvantage. I find some support for the hypothesis that women might strategically engage in coauthorship in the presence of potential information asymmetries and stereotypes. In fact, in smaller fields, there are no gender differences in the propensity to coauthor, whereas in larger ones, women have fewer coauthors than men. In STEMM fields where authors are listed alphabetically, the gender difference in the share of female coauthors is consistently larger than in STEMM fields where authors are listed according to contribution
Reviewing, indicating, and counting books for modern research evaluation systems
In this chapter, we focus on the specialists who have helped to improve the
conditions for book assessments in research evaluation exercises, with
empirically based data and insights supporting their greater integration. Our
review highlights the research carried out by four types of expert communities,
referred to as the monitors, the subject classifiers, the indexers and the
indicator constructionists. Many challenges lie ahead for scholars affiliated
with these communities, particularly the latter three. By acknowledging their
unique, yet interrelated roles, we show where the greatest potential is for
both quantitative and qualitative indicator advancements in book-inclusive
evaluation systems.Comment: Forthcoming in Glanzel, W., Moed, H.F., Schmoch U., Thelwall, M.
(2018). Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators. Springer Some
corrections made in subsection 'Publisher prestige or quality
Italian sociologists: A community of disconnected groups
Examining coauthorship networks is key to study scientific collaboration patterns and structural characteristics of scientific communities. Here, we studied coauthorship networks of sociologists in Italy, using temporal and multi-level quantitative analysis. By looking at publications indexed in Scopus, we detected research communities among Italian sociologists. We found that Italian sociologists are fractured in many disconnected groups. The giant connected component of the Italian sociology could be split into five main groups with a mixture of three main disciplinary topics: sociology of culture and communication (present in two groups), economic sociology (present in three groups) and general sociology (present in three groups). By applying an exponential random graph model, we found that collaboration ties are mainly driven by the research interests of these groups. Other factors, such as preferential attachment, gender and affiliation homophily are also important, but the effect of gender fades away once other factors are controlled for. Our research shows the advantages of multi-level and temporal network analysis in revealing the complexity of scientific collaboration patterns
Making visible the invisible through the analysis of acknowledgements in the humanities
Purpose: Science is subject to a normative structure that includes how the
contributions and interactions between scientists are rewarded. Authorship and
citations have been the key elements within the reward system of science,
whereas acknowledgements, despite being a well-established element in scholarly
communication, have not received the same attention. This paper aims to put
forward the bearing of acknowledgements in the humanities to bring to the
foreground contributions and interactions that, otherwise, would remain
invisible through traditional indicators of research performance.
Design/methodology/approach: The study provides a comprehensive framework to
understanding acknowledgements as part of the reward system with a special
focus on its value in the humanities as a reflection of intellectual
indebtedness. The distinctive features of research in the humanities are
outlined and the role of acknowledgements as a source of contributorship
information is reviewed to support these assumptions.
Findings: Peer interactive communication is the prevailing support thanked in
the acknowledgements of humanities, so the notion of acknowledgements as
super-citations can make special sense in this area. Since single-authored
papers still predominate as publishing pattern in this domain, the study of
acknowledgements might help to understand social interactions and intellectual
influences that lie behind a piece of research and are not visible through
authorship.
Originality/value: Previous works have proposed and explored the prevailing
acknowledgement types by domain. This paper focuses on the humanities to show
the role of acknowledgements within the reward system and highlight publication
patterns and inherent research features which make acknowledgements
particularly interesting in the area as reflection of the socio-cognitive
structure of research.Comment: 14 page
Análisis de la participación española en los proyectos de investigación en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades dentro del VI Programa Marco de la Unión Europea (2002-2006)
The objective of this paper is to describe the Social Sciences and Humanities projects with Spanish participation within the Sixth EU Framework Programme (FP6) (2002-2006) as well as the scientific production resulting from these projects. First, we determine the most significant characteristics of the projects with Spanish participation (duration, funding, topics, type of institution, etc.). Secondly, we analyse the scientific production derived from a selection of projects from the Scopus database to analyse some bibliometric features. The results show that the projects have a significant Spanish participation, but below other countries with a smaller demographic volume, and there is little leadership from Spanish institutions. The scientific production is characterized by articles written predominantly in English, published in first-quartile journals and prepared by one or two authors. However, only 14.7% of the articles analysed were coordinated by a Spanish author.El objetivo de este artÃculo es describir los proyectos de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades con participación española dentro del Sexto Programa Marco de la UE (FP6) (2002-2006), asà como la producción cientÃfica resultante de estos proyectos. En primer lugar, determinamos las caracterÃsticas más significativas de los proyectos con participación española (duración, financiación, temática, tipo de institución, etc.). En segundo lugar, analizamos la producción cientÃfica derivada de una selección de proyectos de la base de datos Scopus para analizar algunas caracterÃsticas bibliométricas. Los resultados muestran que los proyectos tienen una importante participación española, pero por debajo de la de otros paÃses con un menor volumen demográfico, y hay poco liderazgo de las instituciones españolas. La producción cientÃfica se caracteriza por artÃculos escritos predominantemente en inglés, publicados en revistas de primer cuartil y elaborados por uno o dos autores. Sin embargo, sólo el 14,7% de los artÃculos analizados están coordinadas por un autor español
Analysis of Spanish Participation in the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Projects within the 6th European Union Framework Programme (2002-2006).
The objective of this paper is to describe the Social Sciences and Humanities projects with Spanish participation within the Sixth EU Framework Programme (FP6) (2002-2006) as well as the scientific production resulting from these projects. First, we determine the most significant characteristics of the projects with Spanish participation (duration, funding, topics, type of institution, etc.). Secondly, we analyse the scientific production derived from a selection of projects from the Scopus database to analyse some bibliometric features. The results show that the projects have a significant Spanish participation, but below other countries with a smaller demographic volume, and there is little leadership from Spanish institutions. The scientific production is characterized by articles written predominantly in English, published in first-quartile journals and prepared by one or two authors. However, only 14.7% of the articles analysed were coordinated by a Spanish author
Age stratification and cohort effects in scholarly communication : a study of social sciences
Aging is considered to be an important factor in a scholar’s propensity to
innovate, produce, and collaborate on high quality work. Yet, empirical studies in the area
are rare and plagued with several limitations. As a result, we lack clear evidence on the
relationship between aging and scholarly communication activities and impact. To this
end, we study the complete publication profiles of more than 1000 authors across three
fields—sociology, economics, and political science—to understand the relationship
between aging, productivity, collaboration, and impact. Furthermore, we analyze multiple
operationalizations of aging, to determine which is more closely related to observable
changes in scholarly communication behavior. The study demonstrates that scholars
remain highly productive across the life-span of the career (i.e., 40 years), and that productivity increases steeply until promotion to associate professor and then remains stable.
Collaboration increases with age and has increased over time. Lastly, a scholar’s work
obtains its highest impact directly around promotion and then decreases over time. Finally,
our results suggest a statistically significant relationship between rank of the scholar and
productivity, collaboration, and impact. These results inform our understanding of the
scientific workforce and the production of science
- …