Gender differences in research productivity: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian academic system
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- There are significant differences in research productivity between men and women in scientific-technological disciplines within the Italian university system.
- Differences are smaller than previously reported in the literature and more noticeable for quantitative performance indicators.
- Men generally perform better, but there are several scientific sectors where women's performance is not inferior.
- Ongoing efforts to address gender inequality may be contributing to a decline in the size of this gap over time.
- The study adds to existing literature on gender differences in research productivity and provides valuable insights into how these differences manifest within a specific academic context.
Authors: Giovanni Abramo, Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo, Alessandro Caprasecca
Abstract: The literature dedicated to analysis of the difference in research productivity between the sexes tends to agree in indicating better performance for men. This study enters in the vein of work on the subject. Through bibliometric examination of the entire population of research personnel working in the scientific-technological disciplines of Italian university system, it confirms the presence of significant differences in productivity between men and women. But such differences result as being smaller than reported in a large part of the literature, confirming an ongoing tendency towards decline, and are also seen as more noticeable for quantitative performance indicators than other indicators. The gap between the sexes presents important sectorial specificities. In spite of the generally better performance of men, it can not be ignored that there are a significant number of scientific sectors in which the performance of women does not result as inferior.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Welcome to our AI assistant! Here are some important things to keep in mind:
- The assistant will only answer questions related to this specific paper.
- Please note that this is not a bot for casual chatting.
- If you want the answer in a language other than the language you chose for navigating the website, simply add "TRANSLATE IN LANGUAGE L" at the end of your query (replace "LANGUAGE L" with the language of your choice).
- For example, you could ask "Can you extract the most important aspect of the paper? TRANSLATE IN SPANISH".
- If you want to keep the history of your questions/answers you should create an account.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through atree representation
Look for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.