Is there a Matilda Effect in Communication Journals?

IF 1.2 Q3 COMMUNICATION
T. Feeley, Zhuohui Yang
{"title":"Is there a Matilda Effect in Communication Journals?","authors":"T. Feeley, Zhuohui Yang","doi":"10.1080/08934215.2021.1974505","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Matilda Effect (ME) predicts women scholars are less likely to be rewarded than men scholars with comparable accomplishments. One manifestation of the ME is bias in relation to citations to an author’s work as a function of gender. ME was tested in eight communication journals for 10 publishing years (2002–2006, 2012–2016). Mixed results were found across 3,324 articles with two journals exhibiting ME effects among the eight examined. For a subset of six journals, men were more likely to cite their own work compared to women. Findings across datasets showed three analyses were statistically significant and two were not significant. Study findings are discussed and it was suggested future research examine a greater number of journals.","PeriodicalId":45913,"journal":{"name":"Communication Reports","volume":"35 1","pages":"1 - 11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2021.1974505","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The Matilda Effect (ME) predicts women scholars are less likely to be rewarded than men scholars with comparable accomplishments. One manifestation of the ME is bias in relation to citations to an author’s work as a function of gender. ME was tested in eight communication journals for 10 publishing years (2002–2006, 2012–2016). Mixed results were found across 3,324 articles with two journals exhibiting ME effects among the eight examined. For a subset of six journals, men were more likely to cite their own work compared to women. Findings across datasets showed three analyses were statistically significant and two were not significant. Study findings are discussed and it was suggested future research examine a greater number of journals.
传播学期刊是否存在玛蒂尔达效应?
“玛蒂尔达效应”(The Matilda Effect, ME)预测,在取得同等成就的情况下,女性学者获得奖励的可能性低于男性学者。ME的一种表现是对作者作品的引用作为性别函数的偏见。在8种传播期刊上进行了10个出版年(2002-2006年,2012-2016年)的ME测试。在3324篇文章中发现了不同的结果,在8篇被调查的期刊中,有两篇显示ME效应。在六种期刊的子集中,男性比女性更有可能引用自己的研究成果。跨数据集的研究结果显示,三个分析具有统计学意义,两个不具有统计学意义。研究结果进行了讨论,并建议未来的研究检查更多的期刊。
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
Communication Reports
Communication Reports COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Communication Reports (CR), published biannually since 1988, is one of two scholarly journals of the Western States Communication Association (WSCA). The journal publishes original manuscripts that are short, data/text-based, and related to the broadly defined field of human communication. The mission of the journal is to showcase exemplary scholarship without censorship based on topics, methods, or analytical tools. Articles that are purely speculative or theoretical, and not data analytic, are not appropriate for this journal. Authors are expected to devote a substantial portion of the manuscript to analyzing and reporting research data.
×
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