The gendered construction of scientific excellence

Interdisciplinary Science Reviews

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 133-145

  Rees, Teresa ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Academic ability; Gender in science; Gendered construction; Research excellence; Scientific excellence

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959675739     PISSN: 03080188     EISSN: 17432790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/030801811X13013181961437     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Bornmann, Lutz, Rüdiger Mutz, and Hans-Dieter Daniel. 2007. Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis. Journal of Infometrics 1(3): 226-38.
2. Brouns, Margo, and Elisabetta Addis, eds. 2004. Gender and excellence in the making. EUR 21222 Report, European Commission, Directorate-General for Research. Luxembourg: Publications office.
3. Buitendijk, Simone, Daniela Corda, Anders Flodström, Anita Holdcroft, Jackie Hunter, Elizabeth Pollitzer, Teresa Rees, Curt Rice, Londa Schiebinger, Martina Schraudner, Karen Sjørup, and Rolf Tarrach. 2011. Women in science and medicine. The Lancet 377(9768): 811.
4. Crompton, Rosemary. 1990. Credentials and careers. In The social mobility of women, ed. G. Payne and P. Abbott. Basingstoke: Falmer Press.
5. European Commission. 1999. Communication from the Commission 'Women and science-Mobilising women to enrich European research'-COM(1999) 76 final-17 February 1999. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/pdf/g_wo_co_en.pdf. (21/03/2011)
6. European Commission. 2003. She figures 2003: Women and science statistics and indicators. Luxembourg: Publications office.
7. European Commission. 2006. She figures 2006: Women and science statistics and indicators. Luxembourg: Publications office.
8. European Commission. 2009a. She figures 2009: Statistics and indicators on gender equality in science. Luxembourg: Publications office. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she_figures_2009_en.pdf. (21/03/2011)
9. European Commission. 2009b. Toolkit: Gender in EU-funded research. Brussels: Directorate General for Research, office for Official Publication of the European Communities.
10. European Commission. 2010. Stocktaking 10 years of women in science policy by the European Commission (1999-2009). http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/stocktaking-10-years-of-women-in-science-book_en.pdf. (21/03/2011)
11. Foschi, Martha. 2004. Blocking the use of gender-based double standards for competence. In Gender and excellence in the making (EUR 21222 Report), ed. M. Brouns and E. Addis, 51-5. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Research.
12. Foschi, Martha. 2006. On the applications-files design for the study of competence and double standards. Sociological Focus 39(2): 115-32.
13. Goldberg, Philip A. 1968. Are women prejudiced against women? Transactions 5: 28-30.
14. Holdcroft, Anita. 2007. Gender bias in research: how does it affect evidence-based medicine? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 100: 2-3.
15. Holdcroft, Anita, Saowarat Snidvongs, and Karen J. Berkley. 2011. Incorporating Gender and Sex Dimensions in Medical Research. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 36: 180-92.
16. Husu L. 2004. Gate-keeping, gender equality and scientific excellence. In: M. Brouns and E. Addis, eds. Gender and Excellence in the Making (EUR 21222 Report, European Commission, Directorate-General for Research). Luxembourg: Publications office.
17. Hyde, Janet S., Sara M. Lindberg, Marcia C. Linn, Amy B. Ellis, and Caroline C. Williams. 2008. Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science 32: 494-5.
18. Klinge, Ineke, and Mineke Bosch. 2001. Gender in research-Gender impact assessment of the specific programmes of the Fifth Framework Programme-Quality of life and management of living resources. European Commission. http://www.genderdiversiteit.nl/en/download/pdf/Gender%20in%20research. pdf. (16/03/2009)
19. Klinge, Ineke, and Mineke Bosch. 2005. Transforming research methodologies in EU life sciences and biomedicine: Gender sensitive ways of doing research. European Journal of Women's Studies 12(3): 377-98.
20. Madera, Juan M., Michelle R. Hebl, and Randi C. Martin. 2009. Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology 94(6): 1591-9.
21. Marsh, Herbert, Lutz Bornmann, Rüdiger Mutz, Hans-Dieter Daniel, and Alison O. Mara. 2009. Gender effects in peer review of grant proposals: A comprehensive meta-analysis comparing traditional and multi-level approaches. Review of Educational Research 79(3): 1290-326.
22. Merton, Robert K. 1968. The Matthew effect in science. Science 159(3810): 56-63.
23. Osborn, Mary, Teresa Rees, Mineke Bosch, Helga Ebeling, Clementine Hermann, Jytte Hilden, Anne McLaren, Rosella Palomba, Leena Peltonen, Carmen Vela, Dominique Wies, Agnes Wold, Joan Mason, and Christine Wenneras. 2000. Science policies in the European Union: Promoting excellence through mainstreaming gender equality. Luxembourg: office for Official Publications of the European Communities (the 'ETAN report'). ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/improving/docs/g_wo_etan_en_200101.pdf. (21/03/2011)
24. Paludi, Michelle A., and William D. Bauer. 1983. Goldberg revisited: What's in an author's name? Sex Roles 9(3): 387-90.
25. Rees, Teresa. 2002. The Helsinki Group on Women and Science: National Policies on women and science in Europe. Luxembourg: office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
26. Sagebiel, Felizitas. 2010. Gendered organisational cultures and networks in engineering research. In Prometea: Women in engineering and technology research, ed. A.-S. Godfroy-Genin. Berlin: Lit-verlag.
27. Schiebinger, Londa. 2008. Gendered innovations in science and engineering. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
28. Schiebinger, Londa and Martina Schraudner. 2011. Interdisciplinary Approaches to Achieving Gendered Innovations in Science, Medicine, and Engineering. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 36: 154-67.
29. Thoraldsdottir T. 2004. Engendered opinions in placement committee decisions. In: M. Brouns and E. Addis, eds. Gender and Excellence in the Making (EUR 21222 Report, European Commission, Directorate-General for Research). Luxembourg: Publications office.
30. Trix, Frances, and Carolyn Psenka. 2003. Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse and Society 14(2): 191-220.
31. Valian, Virginia. 1999a. Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Valian, Virginia. 1999b. The cognitive bases of gender bias. Brooklyn Law Review 65: 1037-67.
33. Vidal, Catherine. 2009. The brain, caught between science and ideology. Interview in Research EU: The magazine of the European Research Area, Special Issue 29: 1. http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-eu/women/article_women16_en.html. (21/03/2011)
34. Wald, Chelsea, and Corrina Wu. 2010. Of mice and women: The bias in animal models. Science 327(5973): 1571-2.
35. Wenneras, Christine, and Agnes Wold. 1997. Nepotism and sexism in peer review. Nature 347: 341-3.