Gender-heterogeneous working groups produce higher quality science

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 10, 2013, Pages

  Campbell, Lesley G ^a,b   Mehtani, Siya ^a   Dozier, Mary E ^a   Rinehart, Janice ^a  

^a RICE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RYERSON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PROBLEM SOLVING; PRODUCTIVITY; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; WRITING; COOPERATION; FEMALE; MALE; SCIENCE; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEXISM;

AUTHORSHIP; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PROBLEM SOLVING; SCIENCE; SEX FACTORS; SEXISM;

EID: 84908138240     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0079147     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Page SE (2008) The Difference-How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. PrincetonUSA: Princeton University Press. 424 p.
2. Bowers CA, Pharmer JA, Salas E (2000) When member homogeneity is needed in work teams-A meta-analysis. Small Group Research 31: 305-327.
3. Stewart GL (2006) A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management 32: 29-55.
4. Webber SS, Donahue LM (2001) Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Management 27: 141-162.
5. Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW (2010) Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups. Science 330: 686-688.
6. Jehn KA, Northcraft GB, Neale MA (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly 44: 741-763.
7. Fenwick GD, Neal DJ (2001) Effect of gender composition on group performance. Gender, Work and Organization 8: 205-225.
8. Kochan T, Bezrukova K, Ely R, Jackson S, Joshi A, et al. (2003) The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management 42: 3-21.
9. Lee C, Farh JL (2004) Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance. Applied Psychology-an International ReviewPsychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale 53: 136-154.
10. Baugh SG, Graen GB (1997) Effects of team gender and racial composition on perceptions of team performance in cross-functional teams. Group & Organization Management 22: 366-383.
11. Chatman JA, O'Reilly CA (2004) Asymmetric reactions to work group sex diversity among men and women. Academy of Management Journal 47: 193-208.
12. Ely RJ, Thomas DA (2001) Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly 46: 229-273.
13. Joshi A, Roh H (2009) The role of context in work team diversity research: a meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal 52: 599-627.
14. Mannix EA, Neale MA (2005) What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 6: 31-55.
15. Myaskovsky L, Unikel E, Dew MA (2005) Effects of gender diversity on performance and interpersonal behavior in small work groups. Sex Roles 52: 645-657.
16. Pelled LH (1996) Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science 7: 615-631.
17. Joshi A (2010) Gender-based effects in "team science": Integrating alter, ego and team level perspectives. Working Paper ed. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
18. Hong L, Page SE (2001) Problem solving by heterogeneous agents. Journal of Economic Theory 97: 123-163.
19. Hong L, Page SE (2004) Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101: 16385-16389.
20. Summers L (2005) Letter to the Faculty Regarding NBER Remarks.
21. Lawrence PA (2006) Men, Women, and Ghosts in Science. PLoS Biology 4: 13-15.
22. Hatch O (1980) Loading the Economy. Policy Review 12: 23-38.
23. Nisbett R, Ross L (1980) Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood CliffsUSA: Prentice-Hall. 352 p.
24. Robbins S, Judge TA (2010) Organizational Behavior. Englewood CliffsUSA: Prentice-Hall. 720 p.
25. Thomas DA, Ely RJ (1996) Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity. Harvard Business Review 74: 79-&.
26. Rigg LS, McCarragher S, Krmenec A (2012) Authorship, Collaboration, and Gender: Fifteen Years of Publication Productivity in Selected Geography Journals. Professional Geographer 64: 491-502.
27. Weltzin JF, Belote RT, Williams LT, Keller JK, Engel EC (2006) Authorship in ecology: attribution, accountability, and responsibility. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4: 435-441.
28. van Praag CM, van Praag BMS (2004) First-author determinants and the benefits of being Professor A (and not Z): An empirical analysis. In: Institute UoAaT, editor. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper. Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
29. Leimu R, Koricheva J (2005) Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? Bioscience 55: 438-443.
30. Leimu R, Koricheva J (2005) What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 28-32.
31. Cole JR, Zuckerman H (1984) The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. Advances in Motivation and Achievement 2: 217-258.
32. Long JS (1992) Measures of sex-differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces 71: 159-178.
33. Borsuk RM, Budden AE, Leimu R, Aarssen LW, Lortie CJ (2009) The Influence of Author Gender, National Language and Number of Authors on Citation Rate in Ecology The Open Ecology Journal 2: 25-28.
34. Copenheaver CA, Goldbeck K, Cherubini P (2010) Lack of Gender Bias in Citation Rates of Publications by Dendrochronologists: What is Unique about this Discipline? Tree-Ring Research 66: 127-133.
35. Aksnes DW, Rorstad K, Piro F, Sivertsen G (2011) Are female researchers less cited? A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62: 628-636.
36. National Science Foundation DoSRS Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering (2009) In: Foundation NS, editor. Arlington, USA.
37. (2005) National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS). In: InCites, editor.
38. Hackett EJ, Parker JN, Conz D, Rhoten D, Parker A (2008) Ecology transformed: the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis and the changing patterns of ecological research. In: Olson GM, Zimmerman A, Bos N, editors. Scientific Collaboration on the Internet Cambridge, USA: MIT Press. pp. 277-296.
39. Foundation NS (1999) Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 1998. In: Foundation NS, editor. Arlington, USA.
40. National Science Foundation DoSRS (2007) Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2007. In: Foundation NS, editor. Arlington, USA:.
41. Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 16569-16572.
42. Science NAo (2009) Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 384 p.
43. Hill C, Corbett C, St. Rose A (2010) Why so few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC, USA: American Association of University Women. 134 p.
44. Valian V (1998) Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women. CambridgeMA: MIT Press. 424 p.
45. National Science Foundation DoSRS (2009) Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2009. In: Foundation NS, editor. Arlington, USA.
46. Ecklund EH, Lincoln AE, Tansey C (2012) Gender segregation in elite academic science. Gender & Society 26: 693-717.
47. Betz N (1997) What stops women and minorities from choosing and completing majors in science and engineering? In: Johnson D, editor. Minorities and girls in school: Effects on achievement and performance. Thousand Oaks, USA: Sage Press. pp. 105-140.
48. Fox MF (2001) Women, science, and academia-Graduate education and careers. Gender & Society 15: 654-666.
49. Ecklund EH, Lincoln AE (2011) Scientists Want More Children. Plos One 6.
50. Wenneras C, Wold A (1997) Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature 387: 341-343.
51. Barres BA (2006) Does gender matter? Nature 442: 133-136.
52. Waltman L, van Eck NJ (2012) The inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society of Information Science 63: 1532-2890.
53. Balaban AT (2012) Positive and negative aspects of citation indices and journal impact factors. Scientometrics 92: 241-247.
54. Kelly CD, Jennions MD (2006) The h index and career assessment by numbers. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21: 167-170.
55. Bornmann L, Mutz R, Daniel H-D (2007) Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59: 830-837.
56. Lehmann S, Jackson AD, Lautrup BE (2006) Measures for measures. Nature 444: 1003-1004.