The effect of gender diversity on scientific team impact: A team roles perspective

IF 3.5 2区 管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Journal of Informetrics Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-08 DOI:10.1016/j.joi.2025.101766
Yi Zhao , Yongjun Zhu , Donghun Kim , Yuzhuo Wang , Heng Zhang , Chao Lu , Chengzhi Zhang
{"title":"The effect of gender diversity on scientific team impact: A team roles perspective","authors":"Yi Zhao ,&nbsp;Yongjun Zhu ,&nbsp;Donghun Kim ,&nbsp;Yuzhuo Wang ,&nbsp;Heng Zhang ,&nbsp;Chao Lu ,&nbsp;Chengzhi Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The influence of gender diversity on the success of scientific teams is of great interest to academia. However, prior findings remain inconsistent, and most studies operationalize diversity in aggregate terms, overlooking internal role differentiation. This limitation obscures a more nuanced understanding of how gender diversity shapes team impact. In particular, the effect of gender diversity across different team roles remains poorly understood. To this end, we define a scientific team as all coauthors of a paper and measure team impact through five-year citation counts. Using author contribution statements, we classified members into leadership and support roles. Drawing on more than 130,000 papers from PLOS journals, most of which are in biomedical-related disciplines, we employed multivariable regression to examine the association between gender diversity in these roles and team impact. Furthermore, we apply a threshold regression model to investigate how team size moderates this relationship. The results show that (1) the relationship between gender diversity and team impact follows an inverted U-shape for both leadership and support groups; (2) teams with an all-female leadership group and an all-male support group achieve higher impact than other team types. Interestingly, (3) the effect of leadership-group gender diversity is significantly negative for small teams but becomes positive and statistically insignificant in large teams. In contrast, the estimates for support-group gender diversity remain significant and positive, regardless of team size.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"20 1","pages":"Article 101766"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Informetrics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725001282","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The influence of gender diversity on the success of scientific teams is of great interest to academia. However, prior findings remain inconsistent, and most studies operationalize diversity in aggregate terms, overlooking internal role differentiation. This limitation obscures a more nuanced understanding of how gender diversity shapes team impact. In particular, the effect of gender diversity across different team roles remains poorly understood. To this end, we define a scientific team as all coauthors of a paper and measure team impact through five-year citation counts. Using author contribution statements, we classified members into leadership and support roles. Drawing on more than 130,000 papers from PLOS journals, most of which are in biomedical-related disciplines, we employed multivariable regression to examine the association between gender diversity in these roles and team impact. Furthermore, we apply a threshold regression model to investigate how team size moderates this relationship. The results show that (1) the relationship between gender diversity and team impact follows an inverted U-shape for both leadership and support groups; (2) teams with an all-female leadership group and an all-male support group achieve higher impact than other team types. Interestingly, (3) the effect of leadership-group gender diversity is significantly negative for small teams but becomes positive and statistically insignificant in large teams. In contrast, the estimates for support-group gender diversity remain significant and positive, regardless of team size.
性别多样性对科学团队影响的影响:团队角色视角
性别多样性对科学团队成功的影响是学术界非常感兴趣的问题。然而,先前的研究结果仍然不一致,大多数研究都是在总体上操作多样性,忽视了内部角色分化。这种限制模糊了对性别多样性如何影响团队影响的更细致的理解。特别是,性别多样性对不同团队角色的影响仍然知之甚少。为此,我们将一个科学团队定义为一篇论文的所有共同作者,并通过5年的引用次数来衡量团队的影响力。使用作者贡献声明,我们将成员分为领导和支持角色。我们利用来自PLOS期刊的13万多篇论文,其中大部分是生物医学相关学科的论文,采用多变量回归来检验这些角色中的性别多样性与团队影响之间的关系。此外,我们应用阈值回归模型来研究团队规模如何调节这种关系。结果表明:(1)性别多样性与团队影响的关系在领导团队和支持团队中均呈倒u型关系;(2)全女性领导团队和全男性支持团队的影响力高于其他团队类型。有趣的是,(3)领导群体性别多样性对小团队的影响显著为负,对大团队的影响显著为正,且不显著。相比之下,无论团队规模大小,对支持小组性别多样性的估计仍然是显著和积极的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Informetrics
Journal of Informetrics Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
16.20%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Journal of Informetrics (JOI) publishes rigorous high-quality research on quantitative aspects of information science. The main focus of the journal is on topics in bibliometrics, scientometrics, webometrics, patentometrics, altmetrics and research evaluation. Contributions studying informetric problems using methods from other quantitative fields, such as mathematics, statistics, computer science, economics and econometrics, and network science, are especially encouraged. JOI publishes both theoretical and empirical work. In general, case studies, for instance a bibliometric analysis focusing on a specific research field or a specific country, are not considered suitable for publication in JOI, unless they contain innovative methodological elements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书