Cited by 9

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review

Inguaggiato, Giulia, Pallise Perello, Claudia, Verdonk, Petra, Schoonmade, Linda, Andanda, Pamela, van den Hoven, Mariette, Evans, Natalie·2024·Research Ethics

Abstract

Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic globally disrupted lives and contributed to the exacerbation of pre-existing inequalities. Women in research were also affected. The prominent role that women played in professional and personal care duties had a detrimental effect on their research outputs, potentially hindering their career progression. Moreover, the challenges faced by women academics during the pandemic, including job loss, increased mental health issues, and the intersection of gender with other socio-demographic traits exacerbated existing gender disparities within academia. By systematically scoping the qualitative literature on the experiences of women researchers during the pandemic, this study sought to explore how women experienced and reacted to the challenges generated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A qualitative meta synthesis of the included studies revealed three themes: gendered professional expectations, colliding identities and coping strategies. These themes show how gendered roles such as teaching and professional care work, associated with the hierarchical and gendered division of tasks both at home and in the workplace, made women feel unsupported and alienated as relevant agents in the academic context. The study reveals the importance of pastoral care, teaching and service work as the essential backbone of the academic infrastructure, especially in times of crises. It also exposes how productivity-focused researcher assessment criteria, rewarding mainly individual results and unrewarding of care and service work, can be viewed as perpetuating structural inequalities based on gender, parenting situations, contractual situations and background. In conclusion, this study exposes the need to proactively address the gendered practices and implicit biases which reproduce inequalities within academia and highlights how paying attention to the experiences and needs of women researchers is essential for improving the resilience and crises preparedness of academic the system.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/17470161241231268

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 87

  1. 10.1108/PR-08-2020-0636 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.ajss.2021.03.003 · DOI
  3. 10.1126/science.260.5106.409 · DOI
  4. 10.1080/01425692.2022.2074375 · DOI
  5. 10.1080/0161956X.2022.2054634 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/07491409.2022.2030607 · DOI
  7. 10.1002/nha3.20359 · DOI
  8. 10.1108/02610151311305597 · DOI
  9. 10.1111/gwao.12750 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/978-3-031-34996-6_3 · DOI
  11. Braun V, Clarke V (2013) Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: Sage.
  12. 10.1017/S1049096520002036 · DOI
  13. 10.1108/GM-07-2020-0236 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1111/gwao.12894 · DOI
  15. 10.1007/s10755-022-09605-w · DOI
  16. Connell R (2009) Gender in World Perspective. Malden: Polity Press.
  17. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.06.006 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1080/14649357.2020.1757891 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31679-2 · DOI
  20. 10.1111/gwao.12811 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/s41587-021-01008-0 · DOI
  22. 10.1177/10690727211057441 · DOI
  23. 10.3390/socsci12010024 · DOI
  24. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2021) She Figures 2021: Policy Briefs. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  25. 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057655 · DOI
  26. 10.1080/09589236.2022.2125863 · DOI
  27. 10.1111/gwao.12895 · DOI
  28. Fraser N, Jaeggi R (2018) Capitalism. A Conversation in Critical Theory. Cambridge: Polity.
  29. 10.1038/s41467-021-26428-z · DOI
  30. 10.1038/d41586-020-02183-x · DOI
  31. 10.1177/13505076211062900 · DOI
  32. 10.1111/gwao.12696 · DOI
  33. 10.1186/s12913-021-06411-6 · DOI
  34. 10.1177/14034948211027816 · DOI
  35. 10.1371/journal.pone.0269834 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.wsif.2014.12.002 · DOI
  37. 10.1111/gwao.12350 · DOI
  38. 10.1111/gwao.12699 · DOI
  39. 10.1177/23780231211006977 · DOI
  40. 10.1111/1468-0432.t01-1-00012 · DOI
  41. 10.1177/1350506804042097 · DOI
  42. 10.1080/14616696.2020.1839670 · DOI
  43. 10.1080/15456870.2022.2123919 · DOI
  44. 10.1002/nha3.20357 · DOI
  45. Lorber J (1994) The Paradoxes of Gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  46. Manzoor D, Hamid S (2021) Work Life balance during COVID-19 lockdown: Experiences of women academicians of Kashmir. Library Philosophy and Practice 2021: 1–7.
  47. 10.1177/0192513X211048476 · DOI
  48. 10.1111/gwao.12823 · DOI
  49. 10.1007/s10755-021-09586-2 · DOI
  50. 10.1080/14616696.2020.1809690 · DOI
  51. 10.1126/sciadv.abd1996 · DOI
  52. Motherscholar C, Myles-Baltzly C, Ho H, et al. (2021) Transformative collaborations: How a motherscholar research collective survived and thrived during COVID-19. International Perspectives in Psychology Research Practice Consultation 10(4): 197–214.
  53. 10.1108/EJTD-04-2022-0052 · DOI
  54. Newlin M, Anthony M (2022) Resilience of female academics in rural South African higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic. African Journal of Gender, Society and Development 11(1): 131–157.
  55. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198716341.003.0005 · DOI
  56. 10.1111/gwao.12346 · DOI
  57. 10.1111/cars.12295 · DOI
  58. Otten R, de Vries R, Schoonmade L (2019) Amsterdam Efficien Deduplication Method. Amsterdam: Zenodo.
  59. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372: n71.
  60. 10.1111/gwao.12655 · DOI
  61. 10.1111/gwao.12618 · DOI
  62. 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002922 · DOI · Paper page
  63. Ramirez Lozano JP, Bridshaw Araya LC, Brito Ochoa MP (2022) Latin American female academic perceptions about the COVID pandemic’s impact on gender equity and within-country inequality. Research Management 20(2): 169–192.
  64. 10.38140/pie.v40i4.6190 · DOI
  65. 10.1177/08912416221075833 · DOI
  66. 10.1080/14330237.2022.2066343 · DOI
  67. 10.3389/feduc.2022.770447 · DOI
  68. 10.1016/j.maturitas.2020.05.009 · DOI
  69. 10.1111/gwao.12682 · DOI
  70. 10.1007/s11192-022-04513-4 · DOI
  71. 10.1080/20590776.2022.2108697 · DOI
  72. 10.1017/S1049096521000615 · DOI
  73. Shomotova A, Karabchuk T (2022) Navigating COVID-19: Female Ph.D. students coping with family, academic, and job duties. International Journal of Women's Studies 23(3): 57–75.
  74. 10.1080/0161956X.2022.2055895 · DOI
  75. 10.1371/journal.pone.0257919 · DOI
  76. 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 · DOI · Paper page
  77. Tronto J (1993) Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for and Ethics of Care. NY/London: Routledge.
  78. 10.1371/journal.pone.0264265 · DOI
  79. 10.1038/d41586-020-01294-9 · DOI
  80. 10.1111/gwao.12751 · DOI
  81. 10.17159/sajs.2022/13176 · DOI
  82. 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104403 · DOI
  83. 10.1016/j.wsif.2021.102522 · DOI
  84. Weil S (1977) Simone Weil Reader. New York: Moyer Bell.
  85. 10.36951/27034542.2021.033 · DOI
  86. 10.1111/soc4.12881 · DOI
  87. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01297 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 9

Metadata

Authors
Inguaggiato, G., Pallise Perello, C., Verdonk, P., Schoonmade, L., Andanda, P., van den Hoven, M., & Evans, N.
Venue
Research Ethics
Published
2024-03-08
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
780-811
ISSN
  • 1747-0161
  • 2047-6094
Cited by
9
References
8
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/17470161241231268
The paper
Inguaggiato, G., Pallise Perello, C., Verdonk, P., Schoonmade, L., Andanda, P., van den Hoven, M., & Evans, N. (2024). The experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review. Research Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161241231268