影响非洲科学出版的因素——性别视角。

Catherine Beaudry, Heidi Prozesky, Carl St-Pierre, Seyed Reza Mirnezami
{"title":"影响非洲科学出版的因素——性别视角。","authors":"Catherine Beaudry,&nbsp;Heidi Prozesky,&nbsp;Carl St-Pierre,&nbsp;Seyed Reza Mirnezami","doi":"10.3389/frma.2023.1040823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A large body of literature on gender differences in scientific publication output has clearly established that women scientists publish less that men do. Yet, no single explanation or group of explanations satisfactorily accounts for this difference, which has been called the \"productivity puzzle\". To provide a more refined portrait of the scientific publication output of women in relation to that of their male peers, we conducted a web-based survey in 2016 of individual researchers across all African countries, except Libya. The resulting 6,875 valid questionnaires submitted by respondents in the STEM, Health Science and SSH fields were analyzed using multivariate regressions on the self-reported number of articles published in the preceding 3 years. Controlling for a variety of variables including career stage, workload, mobility, research field, and collaboration, we measured the direct and moderating effect of gender on scientific production of African researchers. Our results show that, while women's scientific publication output is positively affected by collaboration and age (impediments to women's scientific output decrease later in their careers), it is negatively impacted by care-work and household chores, limited mobility, and teaching hours. Women are as prolific when they devote the same hours to other academic tasks and raise the same amount of research funding as their male colleagues. Our results lead us to argue that the standard academic career model, relying on continuous publications and regular promotions, assumes a masculine life cycle that reinforces the general perception that women with discontinuous careers are less productive than their male colleagues, and systematically disadvantages women. We conclude that the solution resides beyond women's empowerment, i.e., in the broader institutions of education and the family, which have an important role to play in fostering men's equal contribution to household chores and care-work.</p>","PeriodicalId":73104,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9986590/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors that affect scientific publication in Africa-A gender perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Beaudry,&nbsp;Heidi Prozesky,&nbsp;Carl St-Pierre,&nbsp;Seyed Reza Mirnezami\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frma.2023.1040823\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A large body of literature on gender differences in scientific publication output has clearly established that women scientists publish less that men do. Yet, no single explanation or group of explanations satisfactorily accounts for this difference, which has been called the \\\"productivity puzzle\\\". To provide a more refined portrait of the scientific publication output of women in relation to that of their male peers, we conducted a web-based survey in 2016 of individual researchers across all African countries, except Libya. The resulting 6,875 valid questionnaires submitted by respondents in the STEM, Health Science and SSH fields were analyzed using multivariate regressions on the self-reported number of articles published in the preceding 3 years. Controlling for a variety of variables including career stage, workload, mobility, research field, and collaboration, we measured the direct and moderating effect of gender on scientific production of African researchers. Our results show that, while women's scientific publication output is positively affected by collaboration and age (impediments to women's scientific output decrease later in their careers), it is negatively impacted by care-work and household chores, limited mobility, and teaching hours. Women are as prolific when they devote the same hours to other academic tasks and raise the same amount of research funding as their male colleagues. Our results lead us to argue that the standard academic career model, relying on continuous publications and regular promotions, assumes a masculine life cycle that reinforces the general perception that women with discontinuous careers are less productive than their male colleagues, and systematically disadvantages women. We conclude that the solution resides beyond women's empowerment, i.e., in the broader institutions of education and the family, which have an important role to play in fostering men's equal contribution to household chores and care-work.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9986590/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1040823\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1040823","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大量关于科学出版物产出性别差异的文献清楚地表明,女性科学家发表的文章比男性少。然而,没有一种解释或一组解释能令人满意地解释这种差异,这被称为“生产率之谜”。为了更准确地描述女性与男性同行的科学出版物产出,我们在2016年对除利比亚以外的所有非洲国家的个人研究人员进行了一项基于网络的调查。采用多元回归方法对STEM、Health Science和SSH领域的受访者提交的6875份有效问卷进行自我报告近3年发表论文数量的分析。控制职业阶段、工作量、流动性、研究领域和合作等多种变量,我们测量了性别对非洲研究人员科学产出的直接和调节效应。我们的研究结果表明,虽然女性的科学出版物产出受到合作和年龄的积极影响(阻碍女性科学产出的因素在职业生涯后期减少),但它受到护理工作和家务、有限的流动性和教学时间的负面影响。当女性在其他学术任务上投入相同的时间,并筹集到与男性同事相同数量的研究经费时,她们也会同样多产。我们的研究结果让我们认为,标准的学术职业模式,依赖于持续的出版和定期的晋升,假设了一个男性化的生命周期,这强化了一种普遍的看法,即不连续的职业生涯中的女性比男性同事的生产力低,并且系统性地使女性处于劣势。我们的结论是,解决办法不在于赋予妇女权力,即在于更广泛的教育和家庭机构,这些机构在促进男子对家务和照料工作作出平等贡献方面可以发挥重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Factors that affect scientific publication in Africa-A gender perspective.

A large body of literature on gender differences in scientific publication output has clearly established that women scientists publish less that men do. Yet, no single explanation or group of explanations satisfactorily accounts for this difference, which has been called the "productivity puzzle". To provide a more refined portrait of the scientific publication output of women in relation to that of their male peers, we conducted a web-based survey in 2016 of individual researchers across all African countries, except Libya. The resulting 6,875 valid questionnaires submitted by respondents in the STEM, Health Science and SSH fields were analyzed using multivariate regressions on the self-reported number of articles published in the preceding 3 years. Controlling for a variety of variables including career stage, workload, mobility, research field, and collaboration, we measured the direct and moderating effect of gender on scientific production of African researchers. Our results show that, while women's scientific publication output is positively affected by collaboration and age (impediments to women's scientific output decrease later in their careers), it is negatively impacted by care-work and household chores, limited mobility, and teaching hours. Women are as prolific when they devote the same hours to other academic tasks and raise the same amount of research funding as their male colleagues. Our results lead us to argue that the standard academic career model, relying on continuous publications and regular promotions, assumes a masculine life cycle that reinforces the general perception that women with discontinuous careers are less productive than their male colleagues, and systematically disadvantages women. We conclude that the solution resides beyond women's empowerment, i.e., in the broader institutions of education and the family, which have an important role to play in fostering men's equal contribution to household chores and care-work.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating algorithm bias in AI: ensuring fairness and trust in Africa. The ethics of knowledge sharing: a feminist examination of intellectual property rights and open-source materials in gender transformative methodologies. Complexity and phase transitions in citation networks: insights from artificial intelligence research. Designing measures of complex collaborations with participatory, evidence-centered design. Patent data-driven analysis of literature associations with changing innovation trends.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1