Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 93, Issue 1, pp 17–30 | Cite as

Research evaluation. Part II: gender effects of evaluation: are men more productive and more cited than women?

  • Kretschmer Hildrun
  • Pudovkin Alexander
  • Stegmann Johannes
Article

Abstract

Productivity and citedness of the staff of a German medical research institution are analyzed. It was found in our previous study (Pudovkin et al.: Scientometrics, doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0659-z, 2012) that male scientists are more prolific and cited more often than female scientists. We explain in our present study one of the possible causes for obtaining this result with reference to Abramo et al. (Scientometrics 84(3): 821–833, 2009), who found in the small subgroups of star scientists a higher performance of male star scientists with respect to female star scientists; but in the remaining complementary subpopulations the performance gap between the two sexes is marginal. In agreement with Abramo et al. (2009), in our small subgroup of star scientists a higher performance of male star scientists with respect to female star scientists could be found. Contrasting, in the large complementary subgroup even a slightly higher performance of female scientists with respect to male scientists was identified. The last is even stronger expressed in favor of women than Abramo’s result that the performance gap between the two sexes is truly marginal. In addition to Abramo et al. (2009), we already found in our previous study, special indexes characterizing the quality of papers (but not quantity) are not substantially different among sexes compared.

Keywords

Gender Evaluation Productivity Citations Star scientists Gender gap 

Mathematics Subject Classification (2000)

62 68 94 

Notes

Acknowledgement

Part of this work by one of the authors (Kretschmer, H.) was supported by the 7th framework program by the European Commission, SIS-2010-1.3.3.1. Project full title “Academic Careers Understood through Measurement and Norms”, Project acronym ACUMEN.

References

  1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Caprasecca, A. (2009). The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity. Scientometrics, 84(3), 821–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Butterwick, S., & Dawson, J. (2005, January). Undone business: Examining the production of academic labour. Womens Studies International Forum 28(1):51–65.Google Scholar
  3. Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ETAN (2000). Expert working group on women and science. Science policy in the European Union. Promotion excellence through mainstreaming gender equality. European Commission. Directorate—General for Research. Brusssels. http://www.cordis.lu/improving/women/documents.htm.
  5. European Commission. (2009). She Figures 2009. Statistics and indicators on gender equality in science. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  6. Hullmann, A. (2001). Bibliometric and patent indicators by gender: Is it feasible? http://www.cordis.lu/indicators/publications.htm.
  7. Leta, J., & Lewison, G. (2003). The contribution of women in Brazilian science. A case study in astronomy, immunology and oceanography. Scientometrics, 57(3), 339–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Moore, K. M. (1987). Women’s access and opportunity in higher education: toward the twentyfirst century. Comparative Education, 23(1), 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Naldi, F., & Parenti, I.V. (2002, November). Biosoft sas: Bibliometric and patent indicators by gender: Two feasibility studies. Volume 1: Statistics, Volume 2: Methodology. http://www.cordis.lu/indicators/publications.htm.
  10. 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). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Pudovkin, A., Kretschmer, H., Stegmann, J., & Garfield, E. (2012). Research evaluation. Part I: Productivity and citedness of a German medical research institution. Scientometrics. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0659-z.
  12. Vetter, B. M. (1981). Women scientists and engineers: trends in participation. Science, 214, 1313–1321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Zhang, C-T. (2009). The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PlosOne, 4(5):e5429.Google Scholar
  14. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (1996). Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of USA, 93, 12709–12716.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kretschmer Hildrun
    • 1
  • Pudovkin Alexander
    • 2
  • Stegmann Johannes
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of Business Administration/Business ComputingUniversity of Applied SciencesBahnhofstrasseGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Marine Biology, Far East BranchRussian Academy of SciencesVladivostokRussia
  3. 3.BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations