|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
126711
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper applies a methodology utilized in economics to study citation patterns in two International Studies Association journals. The paper analyzes articles published in International Studies Quarterly (ISQ) and International Studies Perspectives (ISP) in 2005. Comparisons are made based on the sex of the authors of articles and the sex of the cited authors in each paper's bibliography. Empirical analyses suggest that male authors of ISQ and ISP articles are less likely to cite work by female scholars in comparison with female authors. Mixed-gender author teams are also significantly less likely to cite research by female scholars relative to female article authors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
187881
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
China has seen a massive higher education expansion, which the literature has dated to the 1999–2008 period with quantitative and qualitative outcomes. However, the consequences for the publication success of Chinese authors worldwide are not well studied. We review the respective Chinese higher education policies and document the dramatic rise in publication success, with a focus on the field of Economics. A substantial set of regressions and robustness checks confirm the understanding that the higher education expansion has indeed let to a substantial worldwide rise in scientific publications in refereed economics journals fueled by the general incentives of the reform, through research collaborations and other quality improving factors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
171287
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Recent studies identified gendered citation gaps in political science journal articles, with male scholars being less likely to cite work by female scholars in comparison to their female peers. Although journal editors, editorial boards, and political scientists are becoming more aware of implicit biases and adopting strategies to remedy them, we know less about the proper baselines for citations in subfields and research areas of political science. Without information about how many women should be cited in a research field, it is difficult to know whether the distribution is biased. Using the gender distribution of membership in professional political science organizations and article authors in 38 political science journals, we provide scholars with suggested minimum baselines for gender representation in citations. We also show that women represent a larger share of organization members than the authors in sponsoring organizations’ journals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
110662
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Existing measures of article and journal impact count citations that articles receive in other articles. Such metrics ignore citations that articles receive in monographs and edited-volume chapters. Counting article citations in books reveals that popular measures of article and journal impact discriminate against articles and journals that receive citations in books rather than (or in addition to) citations in other articles, thereby discriminating against the research contributions of scholars who publish such articles. Analysis of citation patterns over 25 years reveals that citations in books have declined in American politics research while citations in articles have increased; citations in both books and articles remain important in the other subfields. Findings suggest that political scientists should supplement indicators of journal impact based on citations in peer-reviewed articles with measures that account for the citations that published articles receive in books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
126708
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using personal observations and the results from a variety of studies on gender and scholarship, this paper demonstrates that our discipline often holds women's research in lower esteem. It does so by examining gendered patterns in various cultures of academic life, the processes by which intellectual leaders emerge, and coauthorship as one of the most significant social activities undertaken by researchers. Solutions at all institutional levels-professional organizations, journals, grant organizations, universities and colleges, graduate colleges, departments-are suggested. And even well-intentioned individuals, in a variety of roles-departmental leaders, panel organizers, discussants, bloggers, instructors, mentors, colleagues, authors, and journalists-must be willing to examine and change their own practices. The result is win-win: valuing women's research is better for female and male academics, students' intellectual health, the strength of colleges and universities, and the long-run vitality of professional organizations and journals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
172232
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article reviews the participation of and challenges facing women in international affairs in Australia, with a focus on three sectors: the media, the civil service and the academy. We review the qualitative and quantitative data available, and share the results of a number of surveys and scans we have conducted ourselves: of the gender breakdown of undergraduate enrolments in Australian university courses focusing on international affairs; the gender break down of academic staff employed in politics and international relations programmes at Australian universities; the gender breakdown of authors published in the Australian Journal of International Affairs and the Australian Journal of Politics and History from 2000 to the present; and trends in the gender breakdown of citations in articles published in the Australian Journal of International Affairs between 2000–2001 and 2018–2019. We argue that although women in Australia are interested and engaged in international affairs in almost equal measure to their male counterparts, serious structural challenges continue to undermine their equitable representation in key fora and their career progression. This has clear implications for the future scholarship, practice and analysis of international affairs in Australia and beyond.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|