create a website

What should be rewarded? Gender and evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion. (2021). Sanz-Menendez, Luis ; Cruz-Castro, Laura.
In: Journal of Informetrics.
RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:3:s1751157721000675.

Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Cited: 6

Citations received by this document

Cites: 125

References cited by this document

Cocites: 23

Documents which have cited the same bibliography

Coauthors: 0

Authors who have wrote about the same topic

Citations

Citations received by this document

  1. Merit, competition and gender: scientific promotion in public research organisations. (2025). Cruz-Castro, Laura ; Casado, Clara ; Sanz-Menndez, Luis.
    In: Palgrave Communications.
    RePEc:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-05102-5.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  2. Opium in science and society: numbers and other quantifications. (2024). Bornmann, Lutz ; Marewski, Julian N.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05104-1.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  3. How do referees integrate evaluation criteria into their overall judgment? Evidence from grant peer review. (2024). Hug, Sven E.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04915-y.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  4. Is there a “difference-in-difference”? The impact of scientometric evaluation on the evolution of international publications in Egyptian universities and research centres. (2024). Ali, Mona Farouk.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04911-2.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  5. Why do sociologists on academic periphery willingly support bibliometric indicators?. (2024). Guba, Katerina.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04890-4.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  6. Gender gap in faculty promotion. (2024). Olarreaga, Marcelo ; Czech, Agata ; Peila, Olivia.
    In: PLOS ONE.
    RePEc:plo:pone00:0313311.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

References

References cited by this document

  1. Abramo, G. ; Cicero, T. ; D'Angelo, C.A Should the research performance of scientists be distinguished by gender?. 2015 Journal of Informetrics. 9 25-38

  2. Aksnes, D.W. ; Langfeldt, L. ; Wouters, P. Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. 2019 SAGE Open. 9 -

  3. Allison, P.D. Comparing logit and probit coefficients across group. 1999 Sociological Methods & Research. 28 186-208
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  4. Andersen, J.P. ; Nielsen, M.W. Google Scholar and web of science: Examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines. 2018 Journal of Informetrics. 12 950-959

  5. Blau, P.M. The organization of academic work. 1973 Transaction Pub.:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  6. Bornmann, L. Scientific peer review. 2011 Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 45 197-245
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  7. Bornmann, L. ; Marx, W. How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations. 2014 Scientometrics. 98 487-509

  8. Bornmann, L. ; Mutz, R. ; Daniel, H.D. Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis. 2007 Journal of Informetrics. 1 226-238

  9. Bornmann, L. ; Mutz, R. ; Daniel, H.D. How to detect indications of potential sources of bias in peer review: A generalized latent variable modeling approach exemplified by a gender study. 2008 Journal of Informetrics. 2 280-287

  10. Bornmann, L. ; Williams, R. How to calculate the practical significance of citation impact differences? An empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics using adjusted predictions and marginal effects. 2013 Journal of Informetrics. 7 562-574

  11. Bosch, X. Tenure-track plan aims to end university inbreeding. 2001 Nature. 410 -

  12. Bourdieu, P. Homo academicus. 1988 Stanford University Press:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  13. Brands, R.A. ; Fernandez-Mateo, I. Leaning out: How negative recruitment experiences shape women's decisions to compete for executive roles. 2017 Administrative Science Quarterly. 62 405-442
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  14. Braun, D. ; Benninghoff, M. ; Ramuz, R. ; Gorga, A. Interdependency management in universities: A case study.. 2015 Studies in Higher Education. 40 1829-1843
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  15. Breen, R. ; Karlson, K.B. ; Holm, A. Interpreting and understanding logits, probits, and other nonlinear probability models. 2018 Annual Review of Sociology. 44 39-54
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  16. Broder, I.E. Review of NSF economics proposals: gender and institutional patterns. 1993 The American Economic Review. 83 964-970

  17. Buser, T. ; Niederle, M. ; Oosterbeek, H. Gender, competitiveness, and career choices. 2014 The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 129 1409-1447

  18. Buss, D.M. ; Schmitt, D.P. Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. 2019 Annual Review of Psychology. 70 77-110
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  19. Carmichael, H.L. Incentives in academics: Why is there tenure?. 1988 Journal of Political Economy. 96 453-472

  20. Ceci, S.J. ; Ginther, D.K. ; Kahn, S. ; Williams, W.M. Women in Academic Science: A changing landscape. 2014 Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 15 75-141
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  21. Chong, D. ; Citrin, J. ; Conley, P. When self-interest matters. 2001 Political Psychology. 22 541-570
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  22. Cole, S. ; Cole, J.R. ; Simon, G.A. Chance and consensus in peer review. 1981 Science. 214 881-886
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  23. Conti, A. ; Visentin, F. A revealed preference analysis of PhD students’ choices over employment outcomes. 2015 Research Policy. 44 1931-1947

  24. Correll, S.J. Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. 2004 American Sociological Review. 69 93-113
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  25. Croson, R. ; Gneezy, U. Gender differences in preferences. 2009 Journal of Economic Literature. 47 448-474

  26. Cruz-Castro, L. ; Sanz-Menéndez, L. Mobility versus job stability: Assessing tenure and productivity outcomes. 2010 Research Policy. 39 27-38

  27. de Rijcke, S. ; Wouters, P.F. ; Rushforth, A.D. ; Franssen, T.P. ; Hammarfelt, B. Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use—A literature review. 2016 Research Evaluation. 25 161-169

  28. Derks, B. ; Van Laar, C. ; Ellemers, N. The queen bee phenomenon: Why women leaders distance themselves from junior women. 2016 The Leadership Quarterly. 27 456-469
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  29. Derrick, G.E. The evaluators’ eye—impact assessment and academic peer review. 2019 Palgrave Macmillan:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  30. Dillman, D.A. ; Smyth, J.D. ; Christian, L.M. Internet, phone, mail, and mixed–mode surveys: The tailored design method. 2014 Wiley:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  31. Druckman, J.N. ; Lupia, A. Preference Formation. 2000 Annual Review of Political Science. 3 1-24
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  32. Ellemers, N. Gender stereotypes. 2018 Annual Review of Psychology. 69 275-298
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  33. Ellemers, N. ; Rink, F. ; Derks, B. ; Ryan, M.K. Women in high places: When and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this). 2012 Research in Organizational Behavior. 32 163-187
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  34. Fairweather, J.S. Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. 2005 Journal of Higher Education. 76 401-422

  35. Fernandez-Mateo, I. ; Kaplan, S. Gender and organization science: Introduction to a virtual special issue. 2018 Organization Science. 29 1229-1236

  36. Fox, M.F. Gender and clarity of evaluation among academic scientists in research universities. 2015 Science, Technology, & Human Values. 40 487-515
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  37. Fox, M.F. Gender, science, and academic rank: Key issues and approaches. 2020 Quantitative Science Studies. 1 1001-1006
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  38. Fox, M.F. ; Xiao, W. Perceived chances for promotion among women associate professors in computing: Individual, departmental, and entrepreneurial factors. 2013 The Journal of Technology Transfer. 38 135-152

  39. Freese, J. Preferences. 2009 En : Hedström, P. ; Bearman, P. In The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology. OUP: Oxford
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  40. Fundacion Conocimiento y Desarrollo, . 2014 Fundacion CYD:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  41. García-Aracil, A. ; Palomares-Montero, D. Examining benchmark indicator systems for the evaluation of higher education institutions. 2010 Higher Education. 60 217-234
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  42. Ginther, D.K. ; Heggeness, M.L. Administrative discretion in scientific funding: Evidence from a prestigious postdoctoral training program✰. 2020 Research Policy. 49 -

  43. Ginther, D.K. ; Kahn, S. Does science promote women? Evidence from Academia 1973-2001. 2009 En : Freeman, R.B. ; Goroff, D.L. Science and engineering careers in the United States: An analysis of markets and employment. University of Chicago Press:

  44. Gómez, I. ; Bordons, M. ; Fernández, M.T. ; Morillo, F. Structure and research performance of Spanish universities. 2009 Scientometrics. 79 131-146

  45. Gunashekar, S. ; Wooding, S. ; Guthrie, S. How do NIHR peer review panels use bibliometric information to support their decisions?. 2017 Scientometrics. 112 1813-1835

  46. Haddow, G. ; Hammarfelt, B. Quality, impact, and quantification: Indicators and metrics use by social scientists. 2019 Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70 16-26

  47. Hair, J.F. ; Black, W.C. ; Babin, B.J. ; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate data analysis. 2010 Pearson Education, Inc:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  48. Haustein, S. ; Larivière, V. The use of bibliometrics for assessing research: possibilities, limitations and adverse effects. 2015 Springer International Publishing:

  49. Hearn, J.C. ; Anderson, M.S. Conflict in academic departments: an analysis of disputes over faculty promotion and tenure. 2002 Research in Higher Education. 43 503-529
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  50. Heilman, M.E. ; Manzi, F. ; Caleo, S. Updating impressions: The differential effects of new performance information on evaluations of women and men. 2019 Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 152 105-121

  51. Heiphetz, L. ; Spelke, E.S. ; Banaji, M.R. The formation of belief-based social preferences. 2014 Social Cognition. 32 22-47
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  52. Hermanowicz, J.C. . 2009 Univ. of Chicago Press:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  53. Hicks, D. Performance-based university research funding systems. 2012 Research Policy. 41 251-261

  54. Hicks, D. ; Wouters, P. ; Waltman, L. ; de Rijcke, S. ; Rafols, I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. 2015 Nature News. 520 429-

  55. Honicke, T. ; Broadbent, J. The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance: A systematic review. 2016 Educational Research Review. 17 63-84
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  56. Hosmer, D.W. ; Lemeshow, S. ; Sturdivant, R.X. Applied logistic regression. 2013 John Wiley & Sons:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  57. Hug, S.E. ; Aeschbach, M. . 2020 Palgrave Communications:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  58. Jackson, J.K. ; Latimer, M. ; Stoiko, R. The dynamic between knowledge production and faculty evaluation: perceptions of the promotion and tenure process across disciplines. 2017 Innovative Higher Education. 42 193-205
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  59. Kahan, D. M. (2012). Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection: An Experimental Study (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2182588). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2182588.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  60. Kaltenbrunner, W. ; de Rijcke, S. Filling in the gaps: The interpretation of curricula vitae in peer review. 2019 Social Studies of Science. 49 863-883
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  61. Kesebir, S. ; Lee, S.Y. ; Elliot, A.J. ; Pillutla, M.M. Lay beliefs about competition: Scale development and gender differences. 2019 Motivation and Emotion. 43 719-739
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  62. Kinder, D.R. ; Kiewiet, D.R. Economic discontent and political behavior: The role of personal grievances and collective economic judgments in congressional voting. 1979 American Journal of Political Science. 23 495-527
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  63. Lamont, M. How professors think: Inside the curious world of academic judgment. 2009 Harvard University Press:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  64. Lamont, M. Toward a comparative sociology of valuation and evaluation. 2012 Annual Review of Sociology. 38 201-221
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  65. Langfeldt, L. ; Nedeva, M. ; Sörlin, S. ; Thomas, D.A. Co-existing notions of research quality: A framework to study context-specific understandings of good research. 2020 Minerva. 58 115-137
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  66. Langfeldt, L. ; Reymert, I. ; Aksnes, D.W. The role of metrics in peer assessments. 2020 :
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  67. Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2017). The end of gender disparities in science? If only it were true... CWTS. https://www.cwts.nl:443/blog?article=n-q2z294.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  68. Lau, R.R. ; Heldman, C. Self-interest, symbolic attitudes, and support for public policy: A multilevel analysis. 2009 Political Psychology. 30 513-537
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  69. Lawrence, J.H. ; Celis, S. ; Ott, M. Is the tenure process fair?: what faculty think. 2014 The Journal of Higher Education. 85 155-192

  70. Leahey, E. ; Crockett, J.L. ; Hunter, L.A. Gendered academic careers: specializing for success?. 2008 Social Forces. 86 1273-1309
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  71. Leahey, E. ; Keith, B. ; Crockett, J. Specialization and promotion in an academic discipline. 2010 Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 28 135-155
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  72. Lee, C. Commensuration Bias in Peer Review.. 2015 Philosophy of Science. 82 1272-1283
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  73. Lee, C.J. ; Sugimoto, C.R. ; Zhang, G. ; Cronin, B. Bias in peer review. 2013 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64 2-17

  74. Lincoln, Y.S. ; Guba, E.G. Reward systems and emergent missions: Higher education’s dilemma. 1978 The Phi Delta Kappan. 59 464-466
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  75. Lincoln, Y.S. ; Guba, E.G. The distinction between merit and worth in evaluation. 1980 .:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  76. Long, J.S. Group comparisons in logit and probit using predicted probabilities. 2009 Indiana University:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  77. Long, J.S. ; Allison, P.D. ; McGinnis, R. Rank advancement in academic careers: Sex differences and the effects of productivity. 1993 American Sociological Review. 58 703-722
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  78. Long, J.S. ; Fox, M.F. Scientific careers: universalism and particularism. 1995 Annual Review of Sociology. 21 45-71
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  79. Long, J.S. ; Freese, J. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using stata. 2014 Stata Press:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  80. Long, J.S. ; Mustillo, S.A. Using Predictions and Marginal Effects to Compare Groups in Regression Models for Binary Outcomes. 2018 Sociological Methods & Research. -
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  81. Mansfield, E.D. ; Mutz, D.C. Support for free trade: self-interest, sociotropic politics, and out-group anxiety. 2009 International Organization. 63 425-457

  82. Merton, R.K. The normative structure of science.. 1942 Uni. of Chicago Press:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  83. Mize, T.D. Best Practices for Estimating, Interpreting, and Presenting Nonlinear Interaction Effects. 2019 Sociological Science. 6 81-117
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  84. Mize, T.D. ; Doan, L. ; Long, J.S. A General Framework for Comparing Predictions and Marginal Effects across Models. 2019 Sociological Methodology. 49 152-189
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  85. Moed, H.F. Applied evaluative informetrics. 2017 Springer International Publishing:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  86. Mood, C. Logistic regression: why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. 2010 European Sociological Review. 26 67-82
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  87. Moss-Racusin, C.A. ; Dovidio, J.F. ; Brescoll, V.L. ; Graham, M.J. ; Handelsman, J. Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. 2012 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109 16474-16479
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  88. Musselin, C. . 2009 Routledge:
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  89. Musselin, C. How peer review empowers the academic profession and university managers: Changes in relationships between the state, universities and the professoriate. 2013 Research Policy. 42 1165-1173

  90. Niederle, M. ; Vesterlund, L. Gender and competition. 2011 Annual Review of Economics. 3 601-630

  91. Nielsen, M. Scientific performance assessments through a gender lens. 2018 Science & Technology Studies. 31 2-30
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  92. Nielsen, M.W. Gender and citation impact in management research. 2017 Journal of Informetrics. 11 1213-1228

  93. Paradeise, C. ; Thoenig, J.-C. Academic institutions in search of quality: local orders and global standards. 2013 Organization Studies. 34 189-218

  94. Pier, E.L. ; Brauer, M. ; Filut, A. ; Kaatz, A. ; Raclaw, J. ; Nathan, M.J. ; Ford, C.E. ; Carnes, M. Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications. 2018 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115 2952-2957

  95. Reskin, B.F. ; Bielby, D.D. A sociological perspective on gender and career outcomes. 2005 The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 19 71-86

  96. Reuben, E. ; Wiswall, M. ; Zafar, B. Preferences and biases in educational choices and labour market expectations: shrinking the black box of gender. 2017 The Economic Journal. 127 2153-2186

  97. Reymert, I. Bibliometrics in academic recruitment: A screening tool rather than a game changer. 2021 Minerva. 59 53-78
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  98. Reymert, I. ; Jungblut, J. ; Borlaug, N.S.B. Are evaluative cultures national or global? A cross-national study on evaluative cultures in academic recruitment processes in Europe. 2021 Higher Education. -
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  99. Ridgeway, C.L. Why status matters for inequality. 2014 American Sociological Review. 79 1-16
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  100. Ridgeway, C.L. ; Correll, S.J. Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. 2004 Gender and Society. 18 510-531
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  101. Rivera, L.A. When two bodies are (not) a problem: gender and relationship status discrimination in academic hiring. 2017 American Sociological Review. 82 1111-1138
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  102. Rivera, L.A. ; Tilcsik, A. Scaling down inequality: rating scales, gender bias, and the architecture of evaluation. 2019 American Sociological Review. 84 248-274
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  103. Rosa, M.J. ; Sarrico, C.S. ; Amaral, A. Academics’ perceptions on the purposes of quality assessment.. 2012 Quality in Higher Education. 18 349-366
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  104. Sanz-Menéndez, L. Research actors and the state: Research evaluation and evaluation of science and technology policies in Spain. 1995 Research Evaluation. 5 79-88
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  105. Sanz-Menéndez, L. ; Cruz-Castro, L. University academics’ preferences for hiring and promotion systems. 2019 European Journal of Higher Education. 9 153-171
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  106. Sato, S. ; Gygax, P.M. ; Randall, J. ; Schmid Mast, M. The leaky pipeline in research grant peer review and funding decisions: Challenges and future directions. 2021 Higher Education. 82 145-162
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  107. Steinpreis, R.E. ; Anders, K.A. ; Ritzke, D. The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. 1999 Sex Roles. 41 509-528
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  108. Tahamtan, I. ; Bornmann, L. Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature. 2018 Journal of Informetrics. 12 203-216

  109. Thelwall, M. Do females create higher impact research? Scopus citations and Mendeley readers for articles from five countries. 2018 Journal of Informetrics. 12 1031-1041

  110. Thelwall, M. Not dead, just resting: The practical value of per publication citation indicators. 2016 Journal of Informetrics. 10 667-670
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  111. Thelwall, M. ; Bailey, C. ; Tobin, C. ; Bradshaw, N.-A. Gender differences in research areas, methods and topics: Can people and thing orientations explain the results?. 2019 Journal of Informetrics. 13 149-169

  112. Thomas, D.A. ; Nedeva, M. ; Tirado, M.M. ; Jacob, M. Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda. 2020 Research Evaluation. 29 275-288

  113. Tien, F.F. What kind of faculty are motivated to perform research by the desire for promotion?. 2008 Higher Education. 55 17-32
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  114. Todd, Z. ; Madill, A. ; Shaw, N. ; Bown, N. Faculty members’ perceptions of how academic work is evaluated: similarities and differences by gender. 2008 Sex Roles. 59 765-
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  115. van Balen, B. ; van Arensbergen, P. ; van der Weijden, I. ; van den Besselaar, P. Determinants of Success in Academic Careers. 2012 Higher Education Policy. 25 313-334
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  116. van den Brinck, M. ; Brouns, M. ; Waslander, S. Does excellence have a gender? A national research study on recruitment and selection procedures for professorial appointments in The Netherlands.. 2006 Employee Relations. 28 523-539
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  117. van den Brink, M. ; Benschop, Y. Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs. 2012 Organization. 19 507-524
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  118. van der Lee, R., & Ellemers, N. (2018). Perceptions of gender inequality in academia. Reluctance to let go of individual merit ideology. In B. Rutjens & M. Brandt (Eds.), Belief Systems and the Perception of Reality (1 edition). Routledge.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  119. van der Weijden, I. ; Teelken, C. ; de Boer, M. ; Drost, M. Career satisfaction of postdoctoral researchers in relation to their expectations for the future. 2016 Higher Education. 72 25-40
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  120. Waaijer, C.J.F. ; Sonneveld, H. ; Buitendijk, S.E. ; Bochove, C.A.van ; Weijden, I.C.M.van der The role of gender in the employment, career perception and research performance of recent PhD graduates from dutch universities. 2016 PLOS ONE. 11 -

  121. Wang, J. ; Veugelers, R. ; Stephan, P. Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. 2017 Research Policy. 46 1416-1436

  122. Williams, R. Using Heterogeneous Choice Models to Compare Logit and Probit Coefficients Across Groups. 2009 Sociological Methods & Research. 37 531-559
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  123. Williams, R. Using the margins command to estimate and interpret adjusted predictions and marginal effects. 2012 The Stata Journal: Promoting Communications on Statistics and Stata. 12 308-331

  124. Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes. Harvard University Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  125. Youn, T.I.K. ; Price, T.M. Learning from the experience of others: the evolution of faculty tenure and promotion rules in comprehensive institutions. 2009 The Journal of Higher Education. 80 204-237

Cocites

Documents in RePEc which have cited the same bibliography

  1. Study on the predictability of new topics of scholars: A machine learning-based approach using knowledge networks. (2025). Mao, Jin ; Xiao, Lianjie ; Wu, Zhixiang ; Wang, Hao ; Jiang, Hucheng.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:1:s175115772500001x.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  2. Hierarchical Bayesian model to estimate and compare research productivity of Italian academic statisticians. (2024). Negri, Ilia ; Mezzetti, Maura.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05154-5.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  3. Is the scientific impact of the LIS themes gender-biased? A bibliometric analysis of the evolution, scientific impact, and relative contribution by gender from 2007 to 2022. (2024). Cobo, Manuel J ; Choji, Thamyres T ; Moral-Munoz, Jose A.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:10:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05005-3.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  4. Does writing style affect gender differences in the research performance of articles?: An empirical study of BERT-based textual sentiment analysis. (2023). Deng, Zhongzhun ; Ma, Yongchao ; Zhang, YI ; Teng, Ying ; Liu, LI.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04666-w.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  5. Social determinants of citations: An empirical analysis of UK economists. (2023). Zacchia, Giulia ; Mongeau Ospina, Christian Alexander ; Gobbi, Lucio ; D'Ippoliti, Carlo.
    In: Kyklos.
    RePEc:bla:kyklos:v:76:y:2023:i:4:p:827-858.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  6. First-author gender differentials in business journal publishing: top journals versus the rest. (2022). Patil, Vivek H ; Joanis, Steven T.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04235-z.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  7. Predicting the future impact of Computer Science researchers: Is there a gender bias?. (2022). Kuppler, Matthias.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:11:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04337-2.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  8. Investigating the mentorship effect on the academic success of young scientists: An empirical study of the 985 project universities of China. (2022). Zeng, Mingbin ; Shang, Jing ; Zhang, Gupeng.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:16:y:2022:i:2:s1751157722000372.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  9. What should be rewarded? Gender and evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion. (2021). Sanz-Menendez, Luis ; Cruz-Castro, Laura.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:3:s1751157721000675.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  10. Gender differences in research performance within and between countries: Italy vs Norway. (2021). Abramo, Giovanni ; Aksnes, Dag W ; Dangelo, Ciriaco Andrea.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:2:s1751157721000158.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  11. “MANY‐CITEDNESS”: CITATIONS MEASURE MORE THAN JUST SCIENTIFIC QUALITY. (2021). D'Ippoliti, Carlo.
    In: Journal of Economic Surveys.
    RePEc:bla:jecsur:v:35:y:2021:i:5:p:1271-1301.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  12. Gender bias in patenting process. (2020). Yang, Zhongkai ; Wang, Yukai ; Liu, Lanjian.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:14:y:2020:i:3:s1751157719303724.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  13. Diversity of backgrounds and ideas: The case of research evaluation in economics. (2019). Zacchia, Giulia ; D'Ippoliti, Carlo ; Corsi, Marcella ; Dippoliti, Carlo.
    In: Research Policy.
    RePEc:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:9:8.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  14. Are scientific memes inherited differently from gendered authorship?. (2018). Fontainha, Elsa ; Araújo, Tanya ; Araujo, Tanya.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2903-7.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  15. Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study. (2018). Imasato, Takeyoshi ; Perlin, Marcelo S ; Borenstein, Denis.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:116:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2750-6.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  16. Do females create higher impact research? Scopus citations and Mendeley readers for articles from five countries. (2018). Thelwall, Mike.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:4:p:1031-1041.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  17. The Brazilian scientific output published in journals: A study based on a large CV database. (2017). Santos, Andre ; Perlin, Marcelo ; Da Silva, Sergio ; Borenstein, Denis ; Imasato, Takeyoshi.
    In: MPRA Paper.
    RePEc:pra:mprapa:79662.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  18. The specific shapes of gender imbalance in scientific authorships: A network approach. (2017). Fontainha, Elsa ; Araújo, Tanya ; Araujo, Tanya.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:88-102.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  19. The Brazilian scientific output published in journals: A study based on a large CV database. (2017). Santos, Andre ; Da Silva, Sergio ; Imasato, Takeyoshi ; Perlin, Marcelo S ; Borenstein, Denis.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:18-31.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  20. The north–south divide in the Italian higher education system. (2016). Abramo, Giovanni ; Rosati, Francesco ; Dangelo, Ciriaco Andrea.
    In: Scientometrics.
    RePEc:spr:scient:v:109:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2141-9.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  21. The specific shapes of gender imbalance in scientific authorships: a network approach. (2016). Fontainha, Elsa ; Araújo, Tanya ; Araujo, Tanya.
    In: Working Papers Department of Economics.
    RePEc:ise:isegwp:wp172016.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  22. Drivers of academic performance in a Brazilian university under a government-restructuring program. (2016). Rangel, Thiago Fernando ; Clorinda, Maria ; Bini, Luis Mauricio ; Alexandre, Jose.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:151-161.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  23. Gender differences in scientific performance: A bibliometric matching analysis of Danish health sciences Graduates. (2015). Frandsen, Tove Faber ; Jacobsen, Rasmus Hojbjerg ; Brixen, Kim ; Wallin, Johan A ; Ousager, Jakob.
    In: Journal of Informetrics.
    RePEc:eee:infome:v:9:y:2015:i:4:p:1007-1017.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Coauthors

Authors registered in RePEc who have wrote about the same topic

Report date: 2025-09-30 09:44:52 || Missing content? Let us know

CitEc is a RePEc service, providing citation data for Economics since 2001. Last updated August, 3 2024. Contact: Jose Manuel Barrueco.