Gender bias in journals of gender studies

Scientometrics

Volumn 93, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 135-150

  Kretschmer, Hildrun ^a,b   Kundra, Ramesh ^c   Beaver, Donald deB ^d   Kretschmer, Theo ^b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES WILDAU   (Germany)

^b COLLNET Center ^*  (Germany)

^c Williams College ^*

^d WILLIAMS COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Co authorship; Co operation; Collaboration patterns; Gender bias; Social networks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867023794     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0661-5     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Hanning, G., Kretschmer, H., & Liu, Z. (2008). Distribution of co-author pairs 'frequencies of the Journal of Information Technology. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(1), 73-81.
2. Kretschmer, H. (2002). Similarities and dissimilarities in co-authorship networks; gestalt theory as explanation for well-ordered collaboration structures and production of scientific literature. Library Trends, 50(3), 474-497.
3. Kretschmer, H., & Aguillo, I. F. (2004). Visibility of collaboration on the Web. Scientometrics, 61(3), 405-426.
4. Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2007). Lotka's distribution and distribution of co-author Pairs' frequencies. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 308-337.
5. Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2009). Invited keynote speech. Who is collaborating with whom? Explanation of a fundamental principle. In: H. Hou, B. Wang, S. Liu, Z. Hu, X. Zhang, M. Li (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics and 10th COLLNET Meeting, 13-16 September 2009, Dalian, China (CD-ROM for all participants and for libraries).
6. Kundra, R., Beaver, D., Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2008). Co- author pairs' frequencies distribution in journals of gender studies. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(1), 63-71.
7. Naldi, F., Parenti, I. V. (2002). Scientific and technological performance by gender: a feasibility study on patent and bibliometric indicators. Vol. II: methodological report. European Commission Research, EUR 20309.
8. Naldi, F., Luzi, D., Valente, A., & Parenti, I. V. (2004). Scientific and technological performance by gender. In H. F. Moed, et al. (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 299-314). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
9. Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Assortative mixing in networks. Physical Review Letters, 89, 208701.
10. Newman, M. E. J. (2005). Power laws, pareto distributions and Zipf's law. Contemporary Physics, 46(5), 323-351.
11. Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28, 443-455.
12. Pepe, A., & Marko, A. R. (2009). Collaboration in sensor network research: an in-depth longitudinal analysis of assortative mixing patterns. Scientometrics, 84(3), 687-701. This article is published with open access at Springerlink. com.
13. Price, D. de Solla (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
14. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Methods and applications (p. 1994). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.