IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v55y2002i1d10.1023_a1016046819457.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender and productivity differentials in science

Author

Listed:
  • Katarina Prpić

    (Institute of Social Research of Zagreb)

Abstract

The paper presents the results of an examination of gender differences in scientific productivity on a sample of 840 respondents, half the young scientific population in Croatia. In the last decade gender differences in the scientific productivity of young researchers have increased, which may be the result of introducing a more competitive scientific system. Young female researchers publish an average of two scientific papers less than their male counterparts in five years, and their publications reach 70.6% of males" publication productivity in the same period. In the case of both sexes, about 15% researchers publish about half of all research papers, but even the most productive women publish less than their male counterparts Socio-demographic, educational and qualificational predictors contribute more or less equally to the number of scientific publications by women and men. It is not until we introduce structural variables that a strong sex differentiation appears because these factors are much more powerful in explaining the production of women. They show that female scientists" publication productivity is more strongly influenced by their position in the social organization of science. There are also considerable sex differences in the case of individual productivity predictors. International contacts determine the number of papers by female scientists most of all. Attendance at scientific conferences abroad is the most powerful predictor of male productivity, too, but reviewing colleagues" papers and academic degree are also very important.

Suggested Citation

  • Katarina Prpić, 2002. "Gender and productivity differentials in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(1), pages 27-58, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:55:y:2002:i:1:d:10.1023_a:1016046819457
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1016046819457
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1016046819457
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1016046819457?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Preston, Anne E, 1994. "Why Have All the Women Gone? A Study of Exit of Women from the Science and Engineering Professions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1446-1462, December.
    2. B. M. Gupta & Suresh Kumar & B. S. Aggarwal, 1999. "A comparision of productivity of male and female scientists of CSIR," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(2), pages 269-289, June.
    3. Katarina Prpić, 2000. "The Publication Productivity of Young Scientists: An Empirical Study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(3), pages 453-490, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ali Uzun, 2002. "Productivity ratings of institutions based on publication in Scientometrics, Informetrics, and Bibliometrics, 1981–2000," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 297-307, March.
    2. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2011. "Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 145-161, July.
    3. Shulamit Kahn & Donna Ginther, 2017. "Women and STEM," NBER Working Papers 23525, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Kristof Witte & Nicky Rogge, 2010. "To publish or not to publish? On the aggregation and drivers of research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 657-680, December.
    5. Joëlle Noailly & Daniël Waagmeester & Bas Jacobs & Marieke Rensman & Dinand Webbink, 2005. "Scarcity of science and engineering students in the Netherlands," CPB Document 92.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    6. Andrada Elena Urda-Cîmpean & Sorana D. Bolboacă & Andrei Achimaş-Cadariu & Tudor Cătălin Drugan, 2016. "Knowledge Production in Two Types of Medical PhD Routes—What’s to Gain?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Donna K. Ginther & Shulamit Kahn, 2009. "Does Science Promote Women? Evidence from Academia 1973-2001," NBER Chapters, in: Science and Engineering Careers in the United States: An Analysis of Markets and Employment, pages 163-194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Jennifer Hunt, 2016. "Why do Women Leave Science and Engineering?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 69(1), pages 199-226, January.
    9. K. C. Garg & S. Kumar, 2014. "Scientometric profile of Indian scientific output in life sciences with a focus on the contributions of women scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1771-1783, March.
    10. Jan M. Hoem & Gerda Neyer & Gunnar Andersson, 2006. "Education and childlessness," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 14(15), pages 331-380.
    11. Thu-Trang Vuong & Hong Kong T. Nguyen & Tung Manh Ho & Toan Manh Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2017. "The (In)Significance of Socio-Demographic Factors as Possible Determinants of Vietnamese Social Scientists’ Contribution-Adjusted Productivity: Preliminary Results from 2008–2017 Scopus Data," Societies, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Katarina Prpić, 2007. "Changes of scientific knowledge production and research productivity in a transitional society," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 487-511, September.
    13. Pagura, Maria E., 2002. "The Hazard Of Client Exit In Microfinance," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19698, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Rocío Gómez-Crisóstomo & Luz María Romo-Fernández & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2009. "Visibility and responsibility of women in research papers through the order of signatures: the case of the University of Extremadura, 1990–2005," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 225-238, October.
    15. Torre, Margarita, 2022. "Attrition from male dominated occupations: Variation among occupations and women," OSF Preprints uvh2a, Center for Open Science.
    16. Lisa D. Cook & Chaleampong Kongcharoen, 2010. "The Idea Gap in Pink and Black," NBER Working Papers 16331, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Tang, Joyce, 1997. "The glass ceiling in science and engineering," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 383-406.
    18. Timur Narbaev & Diana Amirbekova, 2021. "Research Productivity in Emerging Economies: Empirical Evidence from Kazakhstan," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Jetter Michael & Walker Jay K., 2020. "Gender Differences in Performance and Risk-taking among Children, Teenagers, and College Students: Evidence from Jeopardy!," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 1-24, April.
    20. Rebecca Long & Aleta Crawford & Michael White & Kimberly Davis, 2009. "Determinants of faculty research productivity in information systems: An empirical analysis of the impact of academic origin and academic affiliation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(2), pages 231-260, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:55:y:2002:i:1:d:10.1023_a:1016046819457. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.