Gender differences in scientific collaborations: Women are more egalitarian than men

PLoS ONE

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2017, Pages

  Araújo, Eduardo B ^a,b   Araújo, Nuno A M ^c   Moreira, André A ^a   Herrmann, Hans J ^a,d   Andrade, José S ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF CEARÁ   (Brazil)

^b INSTITUTO FEDERAL DE EDUCAÇÃO   (Brazil)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

^d ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GENDER BIAS; HUMAN; INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH; NATURAL SCIENCE; SEX DIFFERENCE; COOPERATION; FEMALE; MALE; PUBLICATION; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT;

COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PUBLICATIONS; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 85018877320     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176791     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Leslie LL, McClure GT, Oaxaca RL. Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering: A life Sequence Analysis. The Journal of Higher Education. 1996; 69:239-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/2649188
2. Handelsman J, Cantor N, Carnes M, Denton D, Fine E, Grosz B, et al. More women in science. Science. 2005; 309(5738):1190-1191. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1113252 PMID: 16109868
3. Schiebinger L. Getting more women into science: knowledge issues. Harvard Journal of Law & Gender. 2007; 30:350.
4. Duch J, Zeng XHT, Sales-Pardo M, Radicchi F, Otis S, Woodruff TK, et al. The Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact. PLOS One. 2012; 7:e51332. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051332 PMID: 23251502
5. Moss-Racusin C.A., Dovidio JF, Crescoll VL, Graham MJ, Handelsman J. Science Faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012; 109:16474-16479. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109
6. Boyle PJ, Smith LK, N J Cooper KSW, O'Connor H. Gender Balance: Women are funded more fairly in social science. Nature. 2015; 525:181-183. https://doi.org/10.1038/525181a PMID: 26354468
7. Bozeman B, Gaughan M. How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers. Research Policy. 2011; 40(10):1393-1402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.07.002
8. West JD, Jacquet J, King MM, Correll SJ, Bergstrom CT The role of gender in scholarly authorship. PLOS One. 2013; 8:e66121. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066212
9. Cole JR, Zuckerman H. The productivity puzzle: persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. Greenwich: JAI Press; 1984.
10. Lee S, Bozeman B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc Stud Sci. 2005; 35:673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359
11. Abramo G, D'Angelo CA, Murgia G. Gender differences in research collaborations. J Informetr. 2013; 7:811-822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.07.002
12. Fox M. WOMEN, SCIENCE, AND ACADEMIA Graduate Education and Careers. Gender & Society. 2001; 15(5):654-666. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124301015005002
13. Guimerà R, Uzzi B, Spiro J, Amaral LAN. Science. 2005; 308:5722.
14. Lattes Platform;. http://lattes.cnpq.br.
15. Newman MEJ. Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2002; 64:016131. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.64.016131
16. Araújo E.B., Moreira AA, Furtado V, Pequeno THC, Andrade JS Jr. Collaboration Networks from a Large CV Databse: Dynamics, Topology and Bonus Impact. Plos One. 2014; 9(3):e90537. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090537 PMID: 24603470
17. Rhoten D, Pfirman S. Women in interdisciplinary science: Exploring preferences and consequences. Research Policy. 2007; 36(1):56-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.08.001
18. Szell M, Thurner S. How women organize social networks different from men. Scientific Reports. 2013; 3:1-6.
19. Böttcher L., Araújo NAM, Nagler J, Mendes JFF, Helbing D, Herrmann HJ. Gender gap in the ERASMUS mobility program. PLoS One. 2016; 11:e0149514. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149514 PMID: 26901133
20. Cole S. Making Science: Between Nature and Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1992.
21. Prpić K. Gender and productivity differerentials in science. Scientometrics. 2002; 55:27-58. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016046819457
22. Zeng XHT, Duch J, Sales-Pardo M, Moreira JAG, Radicchi F, Ribeiro HV, et al. Differences in collaboration patterns across discipline, career stage, and gender. PLoS Biol. 2016; 14:e1002573. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002573 PMID: 27814355
23. Bozeman B, Corley E. Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy. 2004; 33(4):599-616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.008
24. Sugimoto CR, Ni C, West JD, Larivière V. The academic advantage: gender disparities in patenting. PLoS One. 2015; 10:e0128000. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128000 PMID: 26017626
25. Mena-Chalco J.P., Digiampietri LA, Lopes FM, Jr RMC. Brazilian Bibliometric Coauthorship Networks. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2014; 65:1424-1445. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23010
26. O'Neill E.T., Rogers SA, Oskins WM Characteristics of Duplicate Records in OCLC's Online Union Catalog. Libr ResourTech Serv. 1993; 37:59.
27. Wagner RA, Lowrance R. An extension of the string-to-string correction problem. J Assoc Comput Mach. 1975; 22:177. https://doi.org/10.1145/321879.321880
28. Kyvik S, Teigen M. Child care, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity. Science, Technology & Human Values. 1996; 21(1):54-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399602100103