Gender disparity in publication records: a qualitative study of women researchers in computing and engineering.

IF 7.2 Q1 ETHICS
Mohammad Hosseini, Shiva Sharifzad
{"title":"Gender disparity in publication records: a qualitative study of women researchers in computing and engineering.","authors":"Mohammad Hosseini,&nbsp;Shiva Sharifzad","doi":"10.1186/s41073-021-00117-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current paper follows up on the results of an exploratory quantitative analysis that compared the publication and citation records of men and women researchers affiliated with the Faculty of Computing and Engineering at Dublin City University (DCU) in Ireland. Quantitative analysis of publications between 2013 and 2018 showed that women researchers had fewer publications, received fewer citations per person, and participated less often in international collaborations. Given the significance of publications for pursuing an academic career, we used qualitative methods to understand these differences and explore factors that, according to women researchers, have contributed to this disparity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixteen women researchers from DCU's Faculty of Computing and Engineering were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Once interviews were transcribed and anonymised, they were coded by both authors in two rounds using an inductive approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interviewed women believed that their opportunities for research engagement and research funding, collaborations, publications and promotions are negatively impacted by gender roles, implicit gender biases, their own high professional standards, family responsibilities, nationality and negative perceptions of their expertise and accomplishments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study has found that women in DCU's Faculty of Computing and Engineering face challenges that, according to those interviewed, negatively affect their engagement in various research activities, and, therefore, have contributed to their lower publication record. We suggest that while affirmative programmes aiming to correct disparities are necessary, they are more likely to  improve organisational culture if they are implemented in parallel with bottom-up initiatives that engage all parties, including men researchers and non-academic partners, to inform and sensitise them about the significance of gender equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":74682,"journal":{"name":"Research integrity and peer review","volume":"6 1","pages":"15"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8632200/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research integrity and peer review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-021-00117-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: The current paper follows up on the results of an exploratory quantitative analysis that compared the publication and citation records of men and women researchers affiliated with the Faculty of Computing and Engineering at Dublin City University (DCU) in Ireland. Quantitative analysis of publications between 2013 and 2018 showed that women researchers had fewer publications, received fewer citations per person, and participated less often in international collaborations. Given the significance of publications for pursuing an academic career, we used qualitative methods to understand these differences and explore factors that, according to women researchers, have contributed to this disparity.

Methods: Sixteen women researchers from DCU's Faculty of Computing and Engineering were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Once interviews were transcribed and anonymised, they were coded by both authors in two rounds using an inductive approach.

Results: Interviewed women believed that their opportunities for research engagement and research funding, collaborations, publications and promotions are negatively impacted by gender roles, implicit gender biases, their own high professional standards, family responsibilities, nationality and negative perceptions of their expertise and accomplishments.

Conclusions: Our study has found that women in DCU's Faculty of Computing and Engineering face challenges that, according to those interviewed, negatively affect their engagement in various research activities, and, therefore, have contributed to their lower publication record. We suggest that while affirmative programmes aiming to correct disparities are necessary, they are more likely to  improve organisational culture if they are implemented in parallel with bottom-up initiatives that engage all parties, including men researchers and non-academic partners, to inform and sensitise them about the significance of gender equity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

出版记录中的性别差异:计算机和工程领域女性研究人员的定性研究。
背景:本文对一项探索性定量分析的结果进行了后续研究,该分析比较了爱尔兰都柏林城市大学(DCU)计算机与工程学院的男性和女性研究人员的出版物和引文记录。对2013年至2018年出版物的定量分析表明,女性研究人员发表的出版物较少,人均引用次数较少,参与国际合作的次数较少。鉴于出版物对追求学术生涯的重要性,我们使用定性方法来理解这些差异,并探索女性研究人员认为造成这种差异的因素。方法:采用半结构化问卷对来自DCU计算机与工程学院的16名女性研究人员进行访谈。一旦采访被转录并匿名,两位作者就会使用归纳方法分两轮对其进行编码。结果:受访女性认为,性别角色、隐性性别偏见、她们自身的高专业标准、家庭责任、国籍以及对她们的专业知识和成就的负面看法,都对她们的研究参与、研究资助、合作、出版和晋升机会产生了负面影响。结论:我们的研究发现,DCU计算机与工程学院的女性面临着挑战,根据受访者的说法,这些挑战对她们参与各种研究活动产生了负面影响,因此导致了她们较低的发表记录。我们建议,虽然旨在纠正差异的平权计划是必要的,但如果它们与自下而上的倡议同时实施,包括男性研究人员和非学术合作伙伴,让他们了解性别平等的重要性,并使他们敏感,那么它们更有可能改善组织文化。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信