IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/ep5bx.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gender differences in the patterns and consequences of changing specialization in scientific careers

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Lin
  • Qi, Fan
  • Sivertsen, Gunnar
  • Liang, Liming
  • Campbell, David

Abstract

Changes of specialization in scientific careers is related to the so-called “essential tension” between exploration of new knowledge and exploitation of established knowledge in research and innovation. Changes of specialization are thereby assumed to influence the evolution of science in general. Research has shown that such changes may also affect the success of individual scientists in their careers. However, the gender dimension of this aspect of career development is so far understudied. There is also need for more dynamic indicators to record and interpret career developments in macro data. This study combines the gender perspective with the introduction of new indicators. We selected more than 29,000 scientists in Physics & Astronomy and studied them over six decades using a bibliographic dataset from Scopus. We find that females are less likely to change specialization than their male counterparts, and that the research performance of males is more positively affected by changing specialization. We discuss the policy implications of these findings as well as the methodological advancement related to the new indicators of career development.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Lin & Qi, Fan & Sivertsen, Gunnar & Liang, Liming & Campbell, David, 2023. "Gender differences in the patterns and consequences of changing specialization in scientific careers," SocArXiv ep5bx, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:ep5bx
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/ep5bx
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/650909851e76a41aea8a9969/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/ep5bx?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. An Zeng & Zhesi Shen & Jianlin Zhou & Ying Fan & Zengru Di & Yougui Wang & H. Eugene Stanley & Shlomo Havlin, 2019. "Increasing trend of scientists to switch between topics," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    4. Iina Hellsten & Renaud Lambiotte & Andrea Scharnhorst & Marcel Ausloos, 2007. "Self-citations, co-authorships and keywords: A new approach to scientists’ field mobility?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 469-486, September.
    5. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    6. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(3), pages 527-554, September.
    7. William Lott, 1983. "Are Women Economists at a Disadvantage in Publishing Journal Articles? A Methodological Comment," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 133-138, Apr-Jun.
    8. Maxime Rivest & Etienne Vignola-Gagné & Éric Archambault, 2021. "Article-level classification of scientific publications: A comparison of deep learning, direct citation and bibliographic coupling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, May.
    9. Hirotaka Kawashima & Hiroyuki Tomizawa, 2015. "Accuracy evaluation of Scopus Author ID based on the largest funding database in Japan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 1061-1071, June.
    10. Erin Hengel, 2022. "Publishing While Female: are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2951-2991.
    11. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2019. "Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: Which strategy pays off?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 51-57.
    13. Valeria Aman, 2018. "Does the Scopus author ID suffice to track scientific international mobility? A case study based on Leibniz laureates," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 705-720, November.
    14. Lu Liu & Nima Dehmamy & Jillian Chown & C. Lee Giles & Dashun Wang, 2021. "Understanding the onset of hot streaks across artistic, cultural, and scientific careers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    15. Zhang, Lin & Sivertsen, Gunnar & Du, Huiying & HUANG, Ying & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," SocArXiv 9n347, Center for Open Science.
    16. João M. Fernandes & Paulo Cortez, 2020. "Alphabetic order of authors in scholarly publications: a bibliometric study for 27 scientific fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2773-2792, December.
    17. Tao Jia & Dashun Wang & Boleslaw K. Szymanski, 2017. "Quantifying patterns of research-interest evolution," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(4), pages 1-7, April.
    18. Lawson, Cornelia & Soós,Sándor, 2014. "A Thematic Mobility Measure for Econometric Analysis," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201402, University of Turin.
    19. Lin Zhang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Huiying Du & Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8861-8886, November.
    20. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    21. Henk F. Moed & M’hamed Aisati & Andrew Plume, 2013. "Studying scientific migration in Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 929-942, March.
    22. Chiara Franzoni & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2017. "Academic tenure, risk-taking and the diversification of scientific research," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(7), pages 691-712, October.
    23. Edwin Horlings & Thomas Gurney, 2013. "Search strategies along the academic lifecycle," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1137-1160, March.
    24. Katarina Prpić, 2002. "Gender and productivity differentials in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(1), pages 27-58, September.
    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. Gaetan de Rassenfosse & Kyle Higham & Orion Penner, 2022. "Scientific rewards for biomedical specialization are large and persistent," Working Papers 19, Chair of Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy.
    2. Lu Liu & Benjamin F. Jones & Brian Uzzi & Dashun Wang, 2023. "Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1046-1058, July.
    3. Liang, Zhentao & Ba, Zhichao & Mao, Jin & Li, Gang, 2023. "Research complexity increases with scientists’ academic age: Evidence from library and information science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    4. Guo, Liying & Wang, Yang & Li, Meiling, 2024. "Exploration, exploitation and funding success: Evidence from junior scientists supported by the Chinese Young Scientists Fund," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    5. Thelwall, Mike & Kousha, Kayvan & Stuart, Emma & Makita, Meiko & Abdoli, Mahshid & Wilson, Paul & Levitt, Jonathan, 2023. "Do bibliometrics introduce gender, institutional or interdisciplinary biases into research evaluations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    6. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    7. Balsmeier, Benjamin & Fleming, Lee & Manso, Gustavo, 2017. "Independent boards and innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 536-557.
    8. Schmal, W. Benedikt & Haucap, Justus & Knoke, Leon, 2023. "The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    9. Yu, Xiaoyao & Szymanski, Boleslaw K. & Jia, Tao, 2021. "Become a better you: Correlation between the change of research direction and the change of scientific performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    10. Catherine Bobtcheff & Jérôme Bolte & Thomas Mariotti, 2017. "Researcher’s Dilemma," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(3), pages 969-1014.
    11. Richard T. Carson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jordan J. Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader, 2022. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9042-9060, December.
    12. Xinyi Zhao & Samin Aref & Emilio Zagheni & Guy Stecklov, 2022. "Return migration of German-affiliated researchers: analyzing departure and return by gender, cohort, and discipline using Scopus bibliometric data 1996–2020," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7707-7729, December.
    13. Albert Banal-Estañol & Ines Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2016. "Key Success Drivers in Public Research Grants: Funding the Seeds of Radical Innovation in Academia?," CESifo Working Paper Series 5852, CESifo.
    14. Nicolas Carayol, 2016. "The Right Job and the Job Right: Novelty, Impact and Journal Stratification in Science," Post-Print hal-02274661, HAL.
    15. Feng Shi & James Evans, 2023. "Surprising combinations of research contents and contexts are related to impact and emerge with scientific outsiders from distant disciplines," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Massimiliano Coda-Zabetta & Francesco Lissoni & Ernest Miguelez, 2024. "Star recruitment and internationalization effects: an analysis of the alexander von humboldt professorship programme," Post-Print hal-04648037, HAL.
    17. Jan Schulz, 2016. "Using Monte Carlo simulations to assess the impact of author name disambiguation quality on different bibliometric analyses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1283-1298, June.
    18. Jeppe Nicolaisen & Tove Faber Frandsen, 2022. "Epistemic community formation: a bibliometric study of recurring authors in medical journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4167-4189, July.
    19. Cui, Haochuan & Zeng, An & Fan, Ying & Di, Zengru, 2021. "Quantifying the impact of a teamwork publication," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    20. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.

    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:osf:socarx:ep5bx. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.