Research production in high-impact journals of contemporary neuroscience: A gender analysis

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 232-243

  González Álvarez, Julio ^a   Cervera Crespo, Teresa ^b  

^a UNIVERSITAT JAUME I   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Collaboration patterns; Gender; Neuroscience; Scientific impact; Scientific production; Women

Indexed keywords

NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

COLLABORATION PATTERNS; GENDER; NEUROSCIENCE; SCIENTIFIC IMPACT; WOMEN;

NEUROLOGY;

EID: 85008888496     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.12.007     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., Murgia, G., Gender differences in research collaboration. Journal of Informetrics 7:4 (2013), 811–822, 10.1016/j.joi.2013.07.002.
2. Bala, A., Gupta, B.M., Mapping of Indian neuroscience research: A scientometric analysis of research output during 1999–2008. Neurology India 58:1 (2010), 35–41, 10.4103/0028-3886.60393.
3. Barrios, M., Villarroya, A., Borrego, A., Scientific production in psychology: A gender analysis. Scientometrics 95:1 (2013), 15–23, 10.1007/s11192-012-0816-4.
4. Berardelli, A., Barberini, I., Defazio, G., Mancardi, G.L., Messina, C., Neurological research in Italy in 2003 and 2004. Neurological Sciences 26:4 (2005), 189–193, 10.1007/s10072-005-0475-9.
5. Cavero, J.M., Vela, B., Cáceres, P., Cuesta, C., Sierra-Alonso, A., The evolution of female authorship in computing research. Scientometrics 103:1 (2015), 85–100, 10.1007/s11192-014-1520-3.
6. Cohen, J., Statistical power analysis of the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed., 1988, Academic Press, New York.
7. European Commission, She Figs. 2012 - Gender in research and innovation. [EU Commission – Working Document]. 2013, 10.2777/38520.
8. European Commission, She Figs. 2015 - Gender in research and innovation. [EU Commission – Working Document]. 2016, 10.2777/744106.
9. Finger, S., Women and the History of the Neurosciences. Journal of the History of the Neurosciences 11:1 (2002), 80–86, 10.1076/jhin.11.1.80.9098.
10. Glänzel, W., Danell, R., Persson, O., The decline of Swedish neuroscience: Decomposing a bibliometric national science indicator. Scientometrics 66:1 (2003), 199–218, 10.1023/A:1024185601555.
11. González, J., Cervera, T., Contemporary psychology and women: A gender analysis of the scientific production. International Journal of Psychology, 2016 [submitted].
12. González, J., Palomar, M.A., Twenty-two years of psychological science in Psychological Science. International Journal of Psychology 49:1 (2014), 56–60, 10.1002/ijop.12009.
13. Gravetter, F.J., Wallnau, L.B., Statistics for the behavioral sciences. 9th ed., 2012, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA.
14. Haak, L., Women in neuroscience (WIN): the first twenty years. Journal of the History of the Neurosciences 11:1 (2002), 70–79, 10.1076/jhin.11.1.70.9111.
15. Hopkins, A.L., Jawitz, J.W., McCarty, C., Goldman, A., Basu, N.B., Disparities in publication patterns by gender, race and ethnicity based on a survey of a random sample of authors. Scientometrics 96:2 (2013), 515–534, 10.1007/s11192-012-0893-4.
16. Jagsi, R., Guancial, E.A., Worobey, C.C., Henault, L.E., Chang, Y., Starr, R., et al. The gender gap in authorship of academic medical literature—a 35-year perspective. The New England Journal of Medicine 355:3 (2006), 281–287, 10.1056/NEJMsa053910.
17. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) Edition, Thomson Reuters., 2014.
18. Kretschmer, H., Kundra, R., Beaver, D., Kretschmer, T., Gender bias in journals of gender studies. Scientometrics 93:1 (2012), 135–150, 10.1007/s11192-012-0661-5.
19. Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., Sugimoto, C.R., Bibliometrics: global gender disparities in science. Nature 504:7479 (2013), 211–213, 10.1038/504211a.
20. Lotka, A.J., The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 16 (1926), 317–323.
21. Marsh, H.W., Jayasinghe, U.W., Bond, N.W., Gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications: A substantive-methodological synergy in support of the null hypothesis model. Journal of Informetrics 5:1 (2011), 167–180, 10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.004.
22. Mauleón, E., Bordon, M., Productivity, impact and publication habits by gender in the area of Materials Science. Scientometrics 66:1 (2006), 199–218, 10.1007/s11192-006-0014-3.
23. Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J., Handelsman, J., Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109:41 (2012), 16474–16479, 10.1073/pnas.1211286109.
24. National Science Foundation (NSF), Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2015. Special reports., 2015 Available at: https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/.
25. Nature Neuroscience, Women in neuroscience: a numbers game. Editorial. Nature Neuroscience, 9(7), 2006, 853, 10.1038/nn0706-853.
26. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Education at a Glance 2015. 10.1787/eag-2015-en.
27. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard. 10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2015-en.
28. Pao, M.L., Lotka law-A testing procedure. Information Processing and Management 21 (1985), 305–320.
29. Persson, O.D., Danell, R., Wiborg-Schneider, J., How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. Astrom, F., Danell, R., Larsen, B., Schneider, J., (eds.) Celebrating scholarly communication studies: A festschrift for olle persson at his 60th birthday, 2009, International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Leuven, Belgium, 9–24 Retrieved from http://www8. umu.se/inforsk/Bibexcel/.
30. Rørstad, K., Aksnes, D.W., Publication rate expressed by age, gender and academic position-A large-scale analysis of Norwegian academic staff. Journal of Informetrics 9:2 (2015), 317–333.
31. SCImago (2007). SJR — SCImago Journal & Country Rank. Retrieved September 10, 2015, from http://www.scimagojr.com.
32. Saha, S., Saint, S., Christakis, D.A., Impact factor: A valid measure of journal quality?. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 91(1), 2003, 42.
33. Shen, H., Inequality quantified: Mind the gender gap. Nature 495:7439 (2013), 22–24, 10.1038/495022a.
34. Sotudeh, H., Khoshian, N., Gender differences in science: the case of scientific productivity in Nano Science & Technology during 2005–2007. Scientometrics 98:1 (2014), 457–472, 10.1007/s11192-013-1031-7.
35. UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO Science Report. Towatds. 2030., 2015.
36. Van Arensbergen, P., Van der Weijden, I., Van den Besselaar, P., Gender differences in scientific productivity: a persisting phenomenon?. Scientometrics 93:3 (2012), 857–868, 10.1007/s11192-012-0712-y.
37. Vela, B., Cáceres, P., Cavero, J.M., Participation of women in software engineering publications. Scientometrics 93:3 (2012), 661–669, 10.1007/s11192-012-0774-x.
38. Waltman, L., An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing. Journal of Informetrics 6:4 (2012), 700–711, 10.1016/j.joi.2012.07.008.
39. West, J.D., Jacquet, J., King, M.M., Correll, S.J., Bergstrom, C.T., The role of gender in scholarly authorship. PLoS One, 8(7), 2013, e66212, 10.1371/journal.pone.0066212.
40. Xu, W., Chen, Y., Shen, Z., Neuroscience output of China: A Medline based bibliometric study. Scientometrics 57:3 (2008), 399–409, 10.1023/A:1025060819495.
41. Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z., Duan, Z., Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67 (2016), 967–972, 10.1002/asi.23437.