Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Female Presence in Brazilian Research: Paradigm Shifts

  • Published:
Interchange Aims and scope Submit manuscript

She didn´t write it.

She wrote it, but she shouldn´t have.

She wrote it, but look what she wrote about.

She wrote it, but she wrote only one of it.

She wrote it, but she isn´t really an artist, and it isn´t really art.

She wrote it, but she had help.

She wrote it, but she´s an anomaly.

She wrote it, but…

(Russ, 1997, p. 97)

Abstract

Analyzing the context that involves historical and current reasons of gender inequality in Brazil, this study aims to analyze the positive Brazilian legislation regarding women's performance in scientific research and its effectiveness. The subject is extremely relevant for two main reasons: first, due to the absence of current research that thoroughly examines the effectiveness of laws in favor of women's performance in Brazilian science. Second, because despite the progressive advances, it is necessary to monitor women's performance with the purpose of subsidizing policies aimed at confronting inequalities. The methodology used was bibliographic review and the research technique used was indirect documental by means of written bibliographic and documentary sources. This analysis showed the lack of specific policies to encourage and ensure women's performance in the scientific field and especially the low effectiveness of existing policies. Although neutrality and impartiality are fundamental principles for doing science, in concrete reality and from a gender perspective, the academic and scientific environment are still biased and partial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source INEP (2018)

Fig. 2

Source Adapted from Platform Lattes (2020)

Fig. 3

Source Adapted from Platform Lattes (2020)

Fig. 4

Source CNPq (2020)

Fig. 5

Source Adapted from Nobel Prize (2020)

Fig. 6

Source Adapted from Capes (2020)

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

We authors declare the total availability of data from our research.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. Researchers with greater mobility in research tend to have higher impact citations than those who are not. Less mobility may directly impact academic production and restrict the network of international collaboration and opportunities (Elsevier, 2017).

  2. The data of the platform are updated until 2015 and were accounted for the Master’s programme, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate, Research Productivity and Innovation Stimulus for Competitiveness (MCTIC, 2020).

  3. Data updated in November 30, 2016.

References

  • Almeida, E. C. E., & Guimarães, J. A. (2013). Brazil’s growing production of scientific articles—how are we doing with review articles and other qualitative indicators? Scientometrics, 97(2), 287–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedi, G., Van Dam, N. T., & Munafo, M. (2012). Gender inequality in awarded research grants. The Lancet, 380(9840), 474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brazil. Decree nº 89.460. (1984). Promulgates the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, 1979. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, March 21, 1984, Section 1, p. 4018 (Original Publication).

  • Brazil. Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil. (1988). Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, October 05, 1988, nº 191 – A (Original Publication).

  • BRAZIL, Decree nº 1.973. (1996). Promulgates the Inter-american convention on the prevention, punishment and eradication of violence against women. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, 1996.

  • Brazil. Law nº 4.228. (2002). Institutes, within the federal public administration, the national affirmative action program and makes other arrangements. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, May 14, 2002. Section 1, p. 6.

  • Brazil. Law nº 10.745. (2003). It institutes the year 2004 as the "year of women". Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, 10 de outubro de 2003. Seção 1, p. 2.

  • Brazil, Ministry of Education. Women and Science Program. (2005). Retrieved July 20, 2020, from http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4175&catid=212.

  • Brazil. Law N.°11.340. (2006). It creates mechanisms to restrain domestic and family violence against women (Maria da Penha Law). Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, August 08, 2006. Section 1, p. 1.

  • Brazil. Law nº 13.104. (2015a). It amends the penal code to provide for feminicide as a qualifying circumstance for the crime of homicide, and art. 1 of Law 8072/1990 to include feminicide in the list of heinous crimes. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, March 10, 2015. Section 1, p. 1.

  • Brazil. Law nº 13.165. (2015b). It amends the Electoral Code to reduce the costs of election campaigns, simplify the administration of Political Parties and encourage women's participation. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, November 26, 2015. Section 1, p. 1. (Promulgation of Vetos).

  • Brazil. Law nº 13.243. (2016). Provides on stimuli to scientific development, research, scientific and technological training and innovation. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, January 12, 2016. Section 1, p. 1.

  • Brazil. Law nº 13.536. (2017). It provides for the extension of the terms of scholarships granted by research promotion agencies in cases of maternity and adoption. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, December 08, 2017. Section 1, p. 1.

  • Brazil. Law nº 13.718. (2018). It amends the penal code to define crimes of sexual harassment and rape scene disclosure, to make public unconditioned the nature of criminal prosecution of crimes against sexual freedom and of sexual crimes against the vulnerable, to establish penalty increase causes for these crimes, and to define collective rape and corrective rape as penalty increase causes. Official Journal of the Union, Brasília, DF, September 25, 2018. Section 1, p. 2.

  • Bornmann, L., Wagner, C., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). BRICS countries and scientific excellence: A bibliometric analysis of most frequently cited papers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1507–1513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CAPES (Coordination of Improvement of Higher-Level Personnel). (2017) Women are the majority in Brazilian graduate school. Retrieved July 13, 2020, from https://www.capes.gov.br/36-noticias/8315-mulheres-sao-maioria-na-pos-graduacao-brasileira.

  • CAPES (Coordination of Improvement of Higher-Level Personnel). (2020). Capes Thesis Award. Retrieved July 23, 2020, from https://www.capes.gov.br/premiocapesdetese?view=default.

  • CNPQ (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development). Historical series. Retrieved July 23, 2020, from http://lattes.cnpq.br/web/dgp/por-lideranca-e-sexo.

  • Conference Latin American Women in Exact and Life Sciences. (2004). Retrieved July, 23, 2020 from http://www.cbpf.br/~mulher/.

  • Cunha, L. A. (2014). The legacy of the dictatorship for Brazilian education. Education & Society, 35(127), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duch, J., Zeng, X. H. T., Sales-Pardo, M., Radicchi, F., Otis, S., Woodruff, T. K., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2012). The possible role of resource requirements and academic career-choice risk on gender differences in publication rate and impact. PLoS ONE, 7(12), 51332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsevier (Amsterdam). (2017). Gender in the global research landscape: Analysis of research performance through a gender lens across 20 years, 12 GeoFigureies, and 27 Subject Ares. Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Kemelgor, C. (2001). Introduction: Gender inequality in science: A universal condition? Minerva, 39(2), 153–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, L. P., & Duarte, E. (2017). Equidade de sexo e gênero na pesquisa e na publicação científica. Epidemiologia e Serviços De Saúde. https://doi.org/10.5123/S1679-49742017000300001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossi, M. G. R., Borja, S. D. B., Lopes, A. M., & Andalécio, A. M. L. (2016). As mulheres praticando ciência no Brasil. Revista Estudos Feministas, 24, 11–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guedes, M. D. C. (2008). A presença feminina nos cursos universitários e nas pós-graduações: Desconstruindo a ideia da universidade como espaço masculino. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, 15, 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • INEP (National Institute of Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira). (2019). Census of higher education 2018, statistical notes. Brasília-DF Inep. Retrieved July 20, 2020, from http://download.inep.gov.br/educacao_superior/censo_superior/documentos/2019/censo_da_educacao_superior_2018-notas_estatisticas.pdf.

  • Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Glynn, C. J. (2013). The Matilda effect—role congruity effects on scholarly communication: A citation analysis of communication research and journal of communication articles. Communication Research, 40(1), 3–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science. Nature News, 504(7479), 211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leta, J. (2003). Women in Brazilian science: Growth, contrasts and a profile of success. Advanced Studies, 17(49), 271–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leta, J., Ohayon, P., Carisey, M., & Séchet, P. (2006). Women in research, technological development and innovation: A Brazil/France comparison. Revista Do Serviço Público, 57(4), 531–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ley, T. J., & Hamilton, B. H. (2008). The gender gap in NIH grant applications. Science, 322(5907), 1472–1474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lievore, C., Picinin, C. T., & Pilatti, L. A. (2017). The fields of knowledge in postgraduate studies in Brazil: Longitudinal growth between 1995 and 2014. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas Em Educação, 25(94), 207–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lievore, C., Picinin, C. T., & Pilatti, L. A. (2019). Brazilian’s graduate programs: Research and development from 1995 to 2017. Interchange, 50(2), 249–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, A. E., Pincus, S., Koster, J. B., & Leboy, P. S. (2012). The Matilda effect in science: Awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and 2000s. Social Studies of Science, 42(2), 307–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • L’ORÉAL, Program "For Women in Science. (2006). Retrieved July 20, 2020, from, https://www.paramulheresnaciencia.com.br/.

  • Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MCTIC (Ministry of Science, Technology, Innovation and Communications). (2020). National council for scientific and technological development (CNPq). Statistics. Brasília: Ministry of Science, Technology, Innovations and Communications. Retrieved July 8, 2020, from http://cnpq.br/estatisticas1.

  • Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474–16479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neale-McFall, C. (2020). Job satisfaction, enrichment, and institutional policy: Listening to faculty mothers. Journal of Women and Gender in Higher Education, 13(1), 56–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, M. W. (2016). Gender inequality and research performance: Moving beyond individual-meritocratic explanations of academic advancement. Studies in Higher Education, 41(11), 2044–2060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nobel Prize. (2020). Nobel prizes and laureates. Retrieved July 23, 2020 from https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/.

  • Picinin, C. T. (2010). Analysis of the technical-scientific production of CNPq's productivity fellows: Production engineering in the triennium 2007–2009

  • Platform Lattes (2020). Dados e Estatísticas da Plataforma Lattes. Lattes.cnpq.br. Avaliable at https://lattes.cnpq.br/. Accessed 20 July 2020.

  • RIBEIRO, Djamila. (2017). o que é lugar de fala? Belo Horizonte: Letramento. p. 128.

  • Rossiter, M. W. (1993). The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science, 23(2), 325–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russ, J. (1997). Anomalousness. Feminisms: An anthology of literary theory and criticis (p. 97). Macmillan Education UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiebinger, L. (2001). Feminism has changed science. Edusc, p. 32

  • Schwartzman, S. (1978). Struggling to be born: The scientific community in Brazil. Minerva, 16(4), 545–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, F. F., & Ribeiro, P. R. C. (2011). Women's participation in science: Problematizations about gender differences. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 20, 449–466.

  • Spilki, F. R. (2013). Profile of the productivity fellows of the national council for scientific and technological development (CNPq) in the area of veterinary medicine. Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira, 33(2), 205–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2017). Mothering and professing: Critical choices and the academic career. NASPA Journal about Women in Higher Education, 10(3), 229–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J. D., Jacquet, J., King, M. M., Correll, S. J., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2013). The role of gender in academic authorship. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaz, D. V. (2013). The glass ceiling in public organizations: Evidence for Brazil. Economia e Sociedade, 22(3), 765–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velho, L., & León, E. (2012). The social construction of scientific production by women. cadernos pagu. pp. 309–344.

  • Von Roten, F. (2011). Gender differences in scientists’ public outreach and engagement activities. Science Communication, 33(1), 52–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Balduíno Taques, 2093, Ed. Palazzo Murano, Ponta Grossa, CEP: 84015-255, Brazil

    Maria Eduarda Lievore

  2. Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná (UTFPR), Balduíno Taques, 2093, Ed. Palazzo Murano, Ponta Grossa, CEP: 84015-255, Brazil

    Caroline Lievore

Authors
  1. Maria Eduarda Lievore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caroline Lievore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Not applicable.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Eduarda Lievore.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lievore, M.E., Lievore, C. Female Presence in Brazilian Research: Paradigm Shifts. Interchange 53, 215–231 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-021-09452-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-021-09452-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation