Advertisement

The role of women scholars in the Chilean collaborative educational research: a social network analysis

  • Juan Pablo QueupilEmail author
  • Ana Luisa Muñoz-García
Article

Abstract

Collaboration is an indispensable tool to promote and increase research. However, little is known about the role of women in collaborative efforts among educational scholars, especially in developing countries, such as Chile. We apply social network analysis (SNA) to examine the relationships and patterns that emerge from a dataset retrieved from Web of Science (WoS) of coauthored scholarly publications. Using sociograms and networks’ centrality indicators (density, degree, betweenness, and closeness) and bibliometric results, this study focuses on detecting the role of women in the collaborative networks. Our results show that the presence of women in the research space is stable across time, but they tend to collaborate more than men, acting as important bridgers since 2000, and that their contribution is relevant in promoting networking. This paper invites a reflection about the policies of research and gender, as well as the positionality of women doing knowledge on education.

Keywords

Women scholars Social network analysis Chile Educational research Collaboration network 

Notes

Funding information

The writing of this article was supported by the International Network for Early Researchers Fund #REDI170106, granted by the Chilean National Commission of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICYT). The ideas expressed are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Commission.

References

  1. Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., & Hwang, J. (2010). Evaluating scholars based on their academic collaboration activities: two indices, the RC-index and the CC-index, for quantifying collaboration activities of researchers and scientific communities. Scientometrics, 83(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C. A., & Capraseccaa, A. (2009). The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity. Scientometrics, 81(1), 137–156.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2131-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C. A., & Murgia, G. (2013). Gender differences in research collaboration. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 811–822.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ackers, L., & Gill, B. (2008). Moving people and knowledge: scientific mobility in a enlarging European Union. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Acuna, M. E. (2016). Mujeres y educacion superior: cartografias de un transito. In C. Zúñiga, J. Redondo, M. López, & E. S. Cruz (Eds.), Equidad en la educacion superior: desafíos y proyecciones en la experiencia comparada (pp. 153–170). Chile: Ediciones y publicaciones El Buen Aire S.A.Google Scholar
  6. Adamic, A., & Adar, E. (2005). How to search a social network. Social Networks, 27(3), 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aequalis. (2017). Participación femenina en cargos directivos en instituciones de educación superior chilena. Nota Técnica. Retrieved March 24, 2018, http://www.aequalis.cl/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Participacion-femenina-en-cargos-directivos-IES4.pdf.
  8. Alemán, A. M. (2017). Generational dispositions of women faculty: a critical examination. In P. L. Eddy, K. Ward, & T. Khwaja (Eds.), Critical approaches to women and gender in higher education (pp. 215–234). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Andersen, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0?: ideas, technologies and implications for education (vol. 1, no. 1). Bristol, England: JISC.Google Scholar
  10. Araujo, K., & Moreno, C. (2005). Nudos Críticos para la Igualdad. Género y Educación Superior en Chile. Santiago, Chile: Universidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano.Google Scholar
  11. Araujo, E. B., Araujo, N. A. M., Moreira, A. A., Herrmann, H. J., & Andrade, J. A. S. (2017). Gender differences in scientific collaborations: women are more egalitarian than men. PLoS One, 12(5), e0176791.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Aten, K., DiRenzo, M., & Shatnawi, D. (2017). Gender and professional e-networks: implications of gender heterophily on job search facilitation and outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 470–478.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Austin, A. E., & Baldwin, R. G. (1991). Faculty collaboration: enhancing the quality of scholarship and teaching. In ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 7. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.Google Scholar
  14. Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 311(3), 590–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Barnes, J. A. (1969). Graph theory and social networks: a technical comment on connectedness and connectivity. Sociology, 3(2), 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Barnett, G. A. (2011). Encyclopedia of social networks, CA: Sage. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Boschini, A., & Sjogren, A. (2007). Is team formation gender neutral? Evidence from coauthorship patterns. Journal of Labor Economics, 25(2), 325–365.  https://doi.org/10.1086/510764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Boyle, P. J., Smith, L. K., Cooper, N. J., Williams, K. S., & O'Connor, H. (2015). Gender balance: women are funded more fairly in social science. Nature, 525, 181–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers. Research Policy, 40(10), 1393–1402.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bozeman, B., & Youtie, J. (2016). Trouble in paradise: problems in academic research co-authoring. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(6), 1717–1743.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9722-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bozeman, B., Gaughan, M., Youtie, J., Slade, C. P., & Rimes, H. (2016). Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: dispatches from the front lines. Science and Public Policy, 43(2), 226–244.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scv035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Braisher, T. L., Symonds, M. R. E., & Gemmell, N. J. (2005). Publication success in nature and science is not gender dependent. BioEssays, 27(8), 858–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Brunner, J. J., & Salazar, F. (2009). La investigación educacional en Chile: una aproximación bibliométrica no convencional. Documento de Trabajo CPCE, 1. Retrieved June 6, 2018, http://www.cpce.cl/publicaciones/documentos-de-trabajo/29-la-investigacion-educacional-en-chile-una-aproximacion-bibliometrica-no-convencional.
  25. Carcamo, P. F., Garay-Fluhmann, R., & Gaymer, C. F. (2014). Collaboration and knowledge networks in coastal resources management: how critical stakeholders interact for multiple-use marine protected area implementation. Ocean & Coastal Management, 91, 5–16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.01.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Castillo, R., Grazzi, M., & Tacsir, E. (2014). Women in science and technology. What does the literature say. Retrieved March 24, 2018, https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/6047/CTI_TN_Women_in_Science_and_Technology.pdf?sequence=1.
  27. CINDA. (2016). Educación Superior en Iberoamérica: Informe 2016. Retrieved June 6, 2018, https://www.cinda.cl/download/libros/CINDA-2012-Informe-de-Educacion-Superior-INTERIOR-101%20(1).pdf.
  28. Coate, K., & Howson, C. K. (2016). Indicators of esteem: gender and prestige in academic work. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(4), 567–585.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2014.955082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. CONICYT. (2016). Realidad nacional en formacion y promocion de mujeres cientificas en ciencia, tecnologia, ingenieira y matematicas. Retrieved March 24, 2018, Santiago, Chile: http://www.conicyt.cl/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/PPT-Estudio-Realidad-NACIONAL-Genero-y-STEM_16_CONICYT-ISONOMA.pdf.
  30. CONICYT. (2017a). Participación femenina en programas de CONICYT 2007–2016. Retrieved March 24, 2018, www.conicyt.cl.
  31. CONICYT. (2017b). Política Institucional Equidad de Género en Ciencias y Tecnología. Período 2017–2025. Retrieved March 24, 2018, www.conicyt.cl.
  32. Cruz-Ramírez, M., Escalona-Reyes, M., Cabrera-García, S., & Martínez-Cepena, M. C. (2014). Análisis cienciométrico de las publicaciones educacionales cubanas en la WoS y Scopus (2003–2012). Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(3), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Degenee, A., & Forse, M. (1999). Introducing social networks. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Dehdarirad, T., Villarroya, A., & Barrios, M. (2015). Research on women in science and higher education: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 103(3), 795–812.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1574-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis: a study in the sociology of science. Vancouver: Empirical Press.Google Scholar
  38. Gaskell, J. (2013). Reflections on women and success in the academy. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(4), 615–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gergen, K. J. (2009). Relational being: beyond self and community. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Grosz, E. (2010). The practice of feminist theory. Differences—A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, 21(1), 94–108.  https://doi.org/10.1215/10407391-2009-019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Guzman-Valenzuela, C., & Munoz-Garcia, A. L. (2018). Decolonizing international collaborative work: creating new grammars for academic partnerships in Chile. In L. Gornall, B. Thomas, & L. Sweetman (Eds.), Exploring Consensual Leadership in Higher Education: Co-operation, Collaboration and Partnership (pp. 171–190). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  42. Jaksztat, S. (2017). Gender and research productivity. Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie, 46(5), 347–361.  https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2017-1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jiang, Y. (2008). Locating active actors in the scientific collaboration communities based on interaction topology analyses. Scientometrics, 74(3), 471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kato, M., & Ando, A. (2017). National ties of international scientific collaboration and researcher mobility found in nature and science. Scientometrics, 110(2), 673–694.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2183-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(96)00917-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kim, D. H., & Bak, H. J. (2017). Incentivizing research collaboration using performance-based reward systems. Science and Public Policy, 44(2), 186–198.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scw050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2006). Identifying a better measure of relatedness for mapping science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(2), 251–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2008). Social network analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Larivière, V., Vignola-Gagné, E., Villeneuve, C., Gélinas, P., & Gingras, Y. (2011). Sex differences in research funding, productivity and impact: an analysis of Quebec university professors. Scientometrics, 87(3), 483–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lather, P. (2009). Getting lost: feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 30(1), 222–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Leahey, E., Crockett, J. L., & Hunter, L. A. (2008). Gendered academic careers: specializing for success? Social Forces, 86(3), 1273–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Loan-Clarke, J., & Preston, D. (2002). Tensions and benefits in collaborative research involving a university and another organization. Studies in Higher Education, 27(2), 169–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lutter, M., & Schroder, M. (2016). Who becomes a tenured professor, and why? Panel data evidence from German sociology, 1980–2013. Research Policy, 45(5), 999–1013.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Maldonado-Maldonado, A. (2009). Latin American higher education: hope in the struggle. In D. Palfreyman & T. Tapper (Eds.), Structuring mass higher education: the role of elite institutions (pp. 73–94). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Mattessich, P. W., & Monsey, B. R. (1992). Collaboration: what makes it work. A review of research literature on factors influencing successful collaboration. St. Paul: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.Google Scholar
  57. McDowell, J. M., Singell, L. D., & Stater, M. (2006). Two to tango? Gender differences in the decisions to publish and coauthor. Economic Inquiry, 44(1), 153–168.  https://doi.org/10.1093/ei/cbi065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. McNeely, C. L., & Vlaicu, S. (2010). Exploring institutional hiring trends of women in the U.S. STEM professoriate. Review of Policy Research, 27(6), 781–793.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2010.00471.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Morley, L. (2007). Sister-matic: gender mainstreaming in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(5/6), 607–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Muijs, D., Ainscow, M., Chapman, C., & West, M. (2011). Collaboration and networking in education. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. OECD. (2017). The pursuit of gender equality: an uphill battle. Retrieved March 24, 2018, http://www.ungei.org/OECD_2017_The_Pursuit_of_Gender_Equality_book_2017.pdf.
  62. O'Meara, J., & Spittle, M. (2012). Internationalising education: global perspectives on collaboration and change. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  63. Pao, M. L. (1992). Global and local collaborators: a study of scientific collaboration. Information Processing and Management, 28(1), 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Prpic, K. (2002). Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics, 55(1), 27–58.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1016046819457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rivera, L. A. (2017). When two bodies are (not) a problem: gender and relationship status discrimination in academic hiring. American Sociological Review, 82(6), 1111–1138.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122417739294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sakamoto, R., & Chapman, D. W. (2011). Cross-border partnerships in higher education: strategies and issues. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Savigny, H. (2014). Women, know your limits: cultural sexism in academia, 26(7), 794–809. Gender and Education, 26(7), 794–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schaeffer, D. (2001). Feminism and liberalism reconsidered: the case of Catharine MacKinnon. The American Political Science Review, 95(3), 699–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schensul, J. J., LeCompte, M. D., Trotter, R. T., Cromley, E. K., & Singer, M. (1999). Mapping social networks, spatial data, and hidden populations. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  70. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: a handbook. Thousands Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  71. Scott, J., & Carrington, P. J. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of social network analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  72. Sheridan, J., Savoy, J. N., Kaatz, A., Lee, Y. G., Filut, A., & Carnes, M. (2017). Write more articles, get more grants: the impact of department climate on faculty research productivity. Journal of Womens Health, 26(5), 587–596.  https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2016.6022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sidhu, R., Rajashekhar, P., Lavin, V. L., Parry, J., Attwood, J., Holdcroft, A., & Sanders, D. S. (2009). The gender imbalance in academic medicine: a study of female authorship in the United Kingdom. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 102(8), 337–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. SIES. (2008). Informe personal académico 2008. Retrieved October 6, 2018, http://www.mifuturo.cl/index.php/informes-sies/academicos.
  75. SIES. (2017a). Informe personal académico 2017. Retrieved June 6, 2018, http://www.mifuturo.cl/index.php/informes-sies/academicos.
  76. SIES. (2017b). Informe de Matrícula 2017 en Educación Superior. Retrieved March 24, 2018, http://www.mifuturo.cl/index.php/informes-sies/matriculados.
  77. Smith, J. L., Handley, I. M., Zale, A. V., Rushing, S., & Potvin, M. A. (2015). Now hiring! Empirically testing a three-step intervention to increase faculty gender diversity in STEM. Bioscience, 65(11), 1084–1087.  https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biv138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tao, Y., Hong, W., & Ma, Y. (2017). Gender differences in publication productivity among academic scientists and engineers in the US and China: similarities and differences. Minerva, 55(4), 459–484.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9320-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2014). R-words: refusing research. In D. Paris & M. T. Winn (Eds.), Humanizing research: decolonizing qualitative inquiry with youth and communities (pp. 223–248). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. UNESCO. (2017). Rendir cuentas en el ámbito de la educación: Cumplir nuestros compromisos. Retrieved June 6, 2018, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002610/261016S.pdf.
  81. UNESCO. (2018). UNESCO eAtlas of gender inequality in education. Retrieved June 6, 2018 https://tellmaps.com/uis/gender/#!/tellmap/79054752/5.
  82. Valian, V. (2005). Beyond gender schemas: improving the advancement of women in academia. Hypatia, 20(3), 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. van den Besselaar, P., & Sandstrom, U. (2015). Early career grants, performance, and careers: a study on predictive validity of grant decisions. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 826–838.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Winslow, S., & Davis, S. N. (2016). Gender inequality across the academic life course. Sociology Compass, 10(5), 404–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wright, H. R., Cooper, L., & Luff, P. (2017). Women’s ways of working: circumventing the masculine structures operating within and upon the university. Womens Studies International Forum, 61, 123–131.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2016.11.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan Pablo Queupil
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ana Luisa Muñoz-García
    • 2
  1. 1.Instituto Interdisciplinario de Pedagogía y EducaciónUniversidad Católica Silva HenríquezSantiagoChile
  2. 2.Facultad de EducaciónPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileMaculChile

Personalised recommendations