The Mathematical Intelligencer

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 38–49 | Cite as

Women’s Representation in Mathematics Subfields: Evidence from the arXiv



Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [AS07]
    O. Aslund and O. N. Skans. Do anonymous job application procedures level the playing field? Working Paper, IFAUInstitute for Labour Market Policy Evaluation, 2007.
  2. [AWM15]
    Association for Women in Mathematics, AWM ADVANCE.
  3. [BCB14]
    L. Behaghel, B. Crepon, and T. Le Barbanchon. Unintended effects of anonymous resumes. Discussion Paper, IZAInstitute for the Study of Labor, 2014.
  4. [BW16]
    Andrew J. Bernoff and Ursula Whitcher. Measuring Gender Representation on Editorial Boards in the Mathematical Sciences. SIAM News, November 2016.
  5. [CMP06]
    Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. 2006.Google Scholar
  6. [CG07]
    F. Connolly, J. A. Gallian, What Students Say About Their REU Experience, in Proceedings of the Conference on Promoting Undergraduate Research in Mathematics, Providence: American Mathematical Society, 2007, pp. 233–236.Google Scholar
  7. [Fow11]
    Kristine K. Fowler, Mathematicians’ Views on Current Publishing Issues: A Survey of Researchers. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, Fall 2011.
  8. [FH15]
    Richard B. Freeman and Wei Huang, Collaborating with People Like Me: Ethnic Coauthorship within the United States. Journal of Labor Economics 33, no. S1 (Part 2, July 2015): S289–S318.Google Scholar
  9. [Gin11]
    Paul Ginsparg, It was twenty years ago today... Preprint, 2011.
  10. [GD09]
    Judy Green and Jeanne LaDuke, Pioneering Women in American Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, 2009.Google Scholar
  11. [HK06]
    Catherine Hobbs and Esmyr Koomen, Statistics on women in mathematics. Preprint, 2006.
  12. [HM09]
    Janet S. Hyde and Janet E. Mertz. Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009.
  13. [Jack02]
    Allyn Jackson. From preprints to e-prints: The rise of electronic preprint servers in Mathematics. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 2002.
  14. [JEC12]
    Joint Economic Committee, US Congress, STEM Education: Preparing for the Jobs of the Future.
  15. [LSMMCT13]
    Vincent Lariviere, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Benoit Macaluso, Stasa Milojevic, Blaise Cronin, and Mike Thelwall, arXiv e-prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships. Preprint, 2013.
  16. [Lau16]
    Kristin Lauter, President’s Report. AWM Newsletter. May–June 2016.
  17. [LCMF15]
    Sarah-Jane Leslie, Andrei Cimpian, Meredith Meyer, and Edward Freeland, Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science 16 January 2015: Vol. 347, no. 6219, pp. 262–265.Google Scholar
  18. [MF02]
    Jane Margolis and Allan Fisher, Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. [Mar15]
    Greg Martin, Addressing the underrepresentation of women in mathematics conferences. Preprint, 2015.
  20. [MBST16]
    Helena Mihaljević-Brandt, Lucía Santamaría, and Marco Tullney, The Effect of Gender in the Publication Patterns in Mathematics. PLOS One October 25, 2016.
  21. [Mur01]
    Margaret Anne Marie Murray, Women Becoming Mathematicians: Creating a Professional Identity in Post-World War II America. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2001.Google Scholar
  22. [NSTC13]
    National Science and Technology Council, Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: 5-Year Strategic Plan.
  23. [NSB15]
    National Science Board, Revisiting the STEM Workforce, 2015.
  24. [NSF15]
    National Science Foundation, Women, Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: Data Tables. January 1, 2015.
  25. [Pie14a]
    Emma Pierson, In Science, It Matters That Women Come Last FiveThirtyEight Aug. 5, 2014.
  26. [Pie14b]
    Emma Pierson, Are Female Scientists Hiding? FiveThirtyEight Aug. 5, 2014.
  27. [Pra15]
    Anaand Prasad, Conference Diversity Distribution Calculator.
  28. [Sch11]
    Londa Schiebinger and Martina Schraudner, Interdisciplinary approaches to achieving gendered innovations in science, medicine, and engineering. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 36 (2) (2011), 154–167.
  29. [She15]
    Saharon Shelah, Shelah’s Archive.
  30. [Shi15]
    Yuri Shimizu, The topological proof of the Poincare conjecture. Preprint, 2015.
  31. [SSQ99]
    S. J. Spencer, C. M. Steele, and D. Q. Quinn, Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35:4–28, 1999.Google Scholar
  32. [SN15]
    F. L. Smyth and B. A. Nosek, On the gender-science stereotypes held by scientists: Explicit accord with gender-ratios, implicit accord with scientific identity. Frontiers in Psychology 6:415, 2015.
  33. [TS16]
    Chad M. Topaz and Shilad Sen, Gender Representation on Journal Editorial Boards in the Mathematical Sciences. PLOS One, August 2016.
  34. [VMR14]
    William Yslas Vélez, James W. Maxwell, and Colleen A. Rose, Report on the 2012–2013 New Doctoral Recipients. Notices of the AMS, 61(8) (2014), 874–884.
  35. [VMR15]
    William Yslas Vélez, James W. Maxwell, and Colleen A. Rose, Fall 2013 Departmental Profile Report. Notices of the AMS, 62(4)(2015), 406–415.
  36. [Zho15]
    Yanlong Zhou. A New Way to Proof \(3x+1\) Problem. Preprint, 2015.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of Wisconsin-Eau ClaireEau ClaireUSA
  2. 2.Mathematical ReviewsAmerican Mathematical SocietyAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations