Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The contribution of women in Brazilian science: A case study in astronomy, immunology and oceanography

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The performance of Brazilian male and female scientists in three scientific fields was assessed through their publications in the Science Citation Index from 1997-2001. Information on their sex and their ages, positions, and fellowship status was obtained from a census on all Brazilian scientists. The results showed that women participated most in immunology, moderately in oceanography and least in astronomy. Men and women published similar numbers of papers, and they were also of similar potential impact; they were also equally likely to collaborate internationally. Nevertheless, women were less likely than men to receive fellowships to supplement their salaries, suggesting that some sexual discrimination may still be occurring in the Brazilian peer-review process.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rossi A. S., Women in science: why so few? Science, 148 (1965) 1196–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Moore K. M., Women.s access and opportunity in higher education: toward the twenty-first century. Comparative Education, 23 (1987) 23–33.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. McGregor E., Harding S., Science by whom? In World Science Report, Paris, UNESCO 1996. At http://www.unesco.org/science/publications/wsrw2

    Google Scholar 

  4. Tobias S., Urry M., Venkatesan A., Physics: for women, the last frontier. Science, 296 (2002) 1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kondro W., Canada-few women win new academic chairs. Science, 296 (2002) 2319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Osborn M., Status and prospects of women in science in Europe. Science, (11 March) 263 (1994) 1389–1391.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Barinaga M., Women in science '94–surprises across the cultural divide. Science, (11 March) 263 (1994) 1468–1496.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hassan F., Islamic women in science. Science, (6 October) 290 (2000) 55–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vetter B. M., Women scientists and engineers: trends in participation. Science, 214 (1981) 1313–1321.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lane J. N., Why are there so few women in science. Science debate. at http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/women/women_frameset.html

  11. Kyvik S., Teigen M., Child care, research collaboration and gender differences in scientific productivity. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21 (1996) 54–71.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dutt D., How much gender disparity exists in salary? A profile of graduates of a major public university. Research in Higher Education, 38 (1997) 631–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Seacgrist L., Disparities detailed in NCI division. Science, 264 (1994) 340.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Etzkowitz H., Kemelgor C., Neuschatz M., Uzzi B., Alonzo J., The paradox of critical mass for women in science. Science, 266 (1994) 51–54.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lewison G., The quantity and quality of female researchers: a bibliometric study of Iceland. Scientometrics, 52(1) (2001) 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Webster, B. M., Polish women in science: a bibliometric analysis of Polish science and its publications, 1980–1999. Research Evaluation, 10(3) (2001) 185–194.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Velho L., León E., A construção social da produção científica por mulheres. Cadernos Pagu, 10 (1988) 309–344.

    Google Scholar 

  18. CNPq, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. Diretório de Grupos de Pesquisa, Available at: http://lattes.cnpq.br:8888/plataformalattes/index.jsp?menu=diretorio/menu0.htm&url=diretorio/apresentacao.htm

  19. Lewison G., The definition of biomedical research sub-fields with title keywords and application to the analysis of research outputs. Research Evaluation, 6(1) (1996) 25–36.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lewison G., The definition and calibration of biomedical sub-fields. Scientometrics, 46(3) (1999) 529–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Basu A., Lewison G., Evaluation of astronomy and astrophysics research output using a title-word search in place of journal classification. In: Eighth International Conference of International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics, Sydney, Australia, 2001.

  22. Lewison G., Lipworth S., Rippon I., Austrian biomedical research outputs 1991–2000. Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Vienna, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gomez I., Sancho R., Moreno L., Fernandez M. T., Influence of Latin-American journals coverage by international databases. Scientometrics, 46(3) (1999) 443–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. FUVEST, Fundação universitária para o Vestibular. Available at http://www.fuvest.br/

  25. Basu A., Vinu Kumar B. S., International collaboration in Indian scientific papers. Scientometrics, 48(3) (2000) 381–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fernandez M. T., Gomez I., Sebastian J., Scientific cooperation of Latin-American countries through bibliometrics indicators. Interciencia, 23(6) (1998) 328+.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Braun T., Glänzel W., International collaboration-will it be keeping alive East European research? Scientometrics, 36(2) (1996) 247–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lewison G., Fawcett-Jones A., Kessler C., Latin American scientific output 1986–91 and international co-authorship patterns. Scientometrics, 27(3) (1993) 317–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Narin F., Stevens K., Whitlow E. S., Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics, 21 (1991) 313–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Van Raan A. F. J., The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results. Scientometrics, 42(3) (1998) 423–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ramsay S., Radical reform of UK consultants. salaries announced. The Lancet, (15 August) 352 (1998) 555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wenneras C., Wold A., Nepotism and sexism in peer review. Nature, 387 (1997) 341–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bruschini C., Crescimento e crise: trabalho das brasileiras, paulistas e nordestinas, de 1970 a 1985. Ciência e Cultura, 42 (1990) 226–247.

    Google Scholar 

  34. IBGE, Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available at http://www.ibge.gov.br

  35. CNPq, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. Diretório de Grupos de Pesquisa, ano 2002. Séries Históricas. Available at http://www.cnpq.br http://lattes.cnpq.br:8888/plataformalattes/index.jsp?menu=diretorio/menu0.htm&url=diretorio/apresentacao.htm

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Biochemistry, Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro (, Brazil

    Jacqueline Leta

  2. Department of Information Science, City University Department of Information Science, London (, England

    Grant Lewison

Authors
  1. Jacqueline Leta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Grant Lewison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leta, J., Lewison, G. The contribution of women in Brazilian science: A case study in astronomy, immunology and oceanography. Scientometrics 57, 339–353 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025000600840

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025000600840

Keywords

Search

Navigation