Research trends in gender differences in higher education and science: a co-word analysis
- 1k Downloads
The aim of this study is to map and analyze the structure and evolution of the scientific literature on gender differences in higher education and science, focusing on factors related to differences between 1991 and 2012. Co-word analysis was applied to identify the main concepts addressed in this research field. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to cluster the keywords and a strategic diagram was created to analyze trends. The data set comprised a corpus containing 652 articles and reviews published between 1991 and 2012, extracted from the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. In order to see how the results changed over time, documents were grouped into three different periods: 1991–2001, 2002–2007, and 2008–2012. The results showed that the number of themes has increased significantly over the years and that gender differences in higher education and science have been considered by specific research disciplines, suggesting important research-field-specific variations. Overall, the study helps to identify the major research topics in this domain, as well as highlighting issues to be addressed or strengthened in further work.
KeywordsGender differences Higher education Science Co-word analysis Strategic diagram
Mathematics Subject Classification62-07
- Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
- Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146–166. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984). The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. In P. Maehr & M. W. Steinkmap (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement (pp. 217–258). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
- European Commission (2009). The gender challenge in research funding. Assessing the European national scenes. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Research.Google Scholar
- European Commission (2013). She Figures 2012. Gender in research and innovation. Brussels: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation.Google Scholar
- Ferriman, K., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Work preferences, life values, and personal views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental changes and gender differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(3), 517–532. doi: 10.1037/a0016030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ginther, D. K., & Kahn, S. (2009). Does science promote women? Evidence from academia 1973–2001. In R. B. Freeman & D. L. Goroff (Eds.), Science and Engineering Careers in the United States: An analysis of markets and employment (pp. 163–194). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- He, Q. (1999). Knowledge Discovery through Co-Word Analysis. Library Trends, 48(1), 133–159.Google Scholar
- Homan, A. C., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphrey, S. E., van Knippenberg, D., Ilgen, D. R., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2008). Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to experience, salience of intra-group differences, and performance of diverse work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1204–1222. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2008.35732995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- League of European Research Universities, LERU. (2012). Women, research and universities: excellence without gender bias. Leuven, Belgium: League of European Research Universities.Google Scholar
- Mason, M. A., & Goulden, M. (2009). UC doctoral student career and life survey (University of California, Berkeley). Retrieved 10 November 2013, from http://ucfamilyedge.berkeley.edu/grad%20life%20survey.html.
- Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109.
- Muñoz-Leiva, F., Viedma-del-Jesús, M., Sánchez-Fernández, J., & López-Herrera, A. (2012). An application of co-word analysis and bibliometric maps for detecting the most highlighting themes in the consumer behaviour research from a longitudinal perspective. Quality & Quantity, 46(4), 1077–1095. doi: 10.1007/s11135-011-9565-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- OECD. (2013). Education at a Glance 2013: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
- Rosser, S. V. (2012). More gender diversity will mean better science. The Chronicle of Higher Education. From http://chronicle.com/article/More-Gender-Diversity-Will/135310/.
- Sonnert, G. (1996). Gender equity in science: Still an elusive goal. Issues in Science and Technology, 12(2), 53–58.Google Scholar
- Sudhier, K. G., & Abhila, I. S. (2011, March 2–4). Publication productivity of social scientists in the Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram: A bibliometric analysis. Paper presented at the 8th International CALIBER, Goa University, Goa.Google Scholar
- Turner, W. A., Chartron, G., Laville, F., & Michelet, B. (1988). Packaging information for peer review: New co-word analysis techniques. In A. F. J. Van Raan (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology. Dordrecht: Elsevier Science Publishers.Google Scholar
- UNESCO. (2012). World atlas of gender equality in education. Paris: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.Google Scholar
- Zinovyeva, N., & Bagues, M. (2011). Does gender matter for academic promotion? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment. IZA Discussion Paper No. 5537.Google Scholar