The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact
Open accessAbstract
Many studies demonstrate that there is still a significant gender bias, especially at higher career levels, in many areas including science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). We investigated field-dependent, gender-specific effects of the selective pressures individuals experience as they pursue a career in academia within seven STEM disciplines. We built a unique database that comprises 437,787 publications authored by 4,292 faculty members at top United States research universities. Our analyses reveal that gender differences in publication rate and impact are discipline-specific. Our results also support two hypotheses. First, the widely-reported lower publication rates of female faculty are correlated with the amount of research resources typically needed in the discipline considered, and thus may be explained by the lower level of institutional support historically received by females. Second, in disciplines where pursuing an academic position incurs greater career risk, female faculty tend to have a greater fraction of higher impact publications than males. Our findings have significant, field-specific, policy implications for achieving diversity at the faculty level within the STEM disciplines.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720
(1968) · PubMed · Cited by 4,803
Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis
Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.367 · Cited by 3,723
Heilman, M. E. (2001) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234 · Cited by 2,482
Beaman, L., Duflo, E., Pande, R., & Topalova, P. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1212382 · Cited by 1,208
Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science
Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1014871108 · Cited by 1,114
The Matthew Matilda Effect in Science
Rossiter, M. W. (1993) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/030631293023002004 · Cited by 1,013
Women's underrepresentation in science: sociocultural and biological considerations
Ceci, S. J., Williams, W. M., & Barnett, S. M. (2009) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0014412 · Cited by 957
The “Gender Gap” in Authorship of Academic Medical Literature — A 35-Year Perspective
Jagsi, R., Guancial, E. A., Worobey, C. C., Henault, L. E., Chang, Y., Starr, R., Tarbell, N. J., & Hylek, E. M. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa053910 · Cited by 870
Cited by
Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science
Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/504211a · Cited by 1,493
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., Petersen, A. M., Radicchi, F., Sinatra, R., Uzzi, B., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao0185 · Cited by 1,497
Self-citationWomen in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape
Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W. M. (2014) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100614541236 · Cited by 1,019
Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines
Huang, J., Gates, A. J., Sinatra, R., & Barabási, A.-L. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1914221117 · Cited by 954
The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented?
Holman, L., Stuart-Fox, D., & Hauser, C. E. (2018) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2004956 · Cited by 769
Metadata
- Authors
- Duch, J., Zeng, X. H. T., Sales-Pardo, M., Radicchi, F., Otis, S., Woodruff, T. K., & Nunes Amaral, L. A.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-12-12
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- e51332
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2075054625
- Cited by
- 255
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 34.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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 Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0051332
- The paper
- Duch, J., Zeng, X. H. T., Sales-Pardo, M., Radicchi, F., Otis, S., Woodruff, T. K., & Nunes Amaral, L. A. (2012). The Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051332
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
