ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022
Gendered citation patterns among the scientific elite.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantifying institutional gender inequality in contemporary visual art.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Girls just wanna have funds: a new Transparent Reporting Scale for evaluating grant data reporting from funding agencies.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026Article
- The distinctive innovation patterns and network embeddedness of scientific prizewinners.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Twenty years of infectious disease dynamics research: gender and race imbalances in publication and citation practices.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Gender differences in resume language and gender gaps in salary expectations.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- [Academics in ophthalmology : An analysis of the gender distribution at German university hospitals and the Clinician Scientist Program].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Review
- [Gender distribution of scientific contributions at German ophthalmological conferences-a baseline study].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Review
- Data transparency and reproducibility in health research: bridging the gap for early-career researchers.Frontiers in antibiotics · 2025Article
- Machine learning misclassification networks reveal a citation advantage of interdisciplinary publications only in high-impact journals.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Gender Disparities in Mentorship and Career Outcomes in Ophthalmology.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2024Article
- A memory-theoretic account of citation propagation.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Overcoming citation bias is necessary for true inclusivity in Plant Science.The Plant cell · 2023Article
- A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors.Nature human behaviour · 2023Article
- The Leading Transplantation Journals: A Trend Analysis, 2011-2021.Journal of transplantation · 2023Review
- Editorial: Women in plant biotechnology 2022.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Gendered citation patterns among the scientific elite.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Diversity in science is necessary to improve innovation and increase the capacity of the scientific workforce. Despite decades-long efforts to increase gender diversity, however, women remain a small minority in many fields, especially in senior positions. The dearth of elite women scientists, in turn, leaves fewer women to serve as mentors and role models for young women scientists. To shed light on gender disparities in science, we study prominent scholars who were elected to the National Academy of Sciences. We construct author citation networks that capture the structure of recognition among scholars' peers. We identify gender disparities in the patterns of peer citations and show that these differences are strong enough to accurately predict the scholar's gender. In contrast, we do not observe disparities due to prestige, with few significant differences in the structure of citations of scholars affiliated with high-ranked and low-ranked institutions. These results provide further evidence that a scholar's gender plays a role in the mechanisms of success in science.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.