IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v9y2021i4p45-d650318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Access Publishing Probabilities Based on Gender and Authorship Structures in Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Huyen Thanh T. Nguyen

    (Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University, Hanoi 100803, Vietnam)

  • Minh-Hoang Nguyen

    (Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University, Hanoi 100803, Vietnam)

  • Tam-Tri Le

    (Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University, Hanoi 100803, Vietnam
    A.I. for Social Data Lab, Vuong & Associates, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam)

  • Manh-Toan Ho

    (Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University, Hanoi 100803, Vietnam
    A.I. for Social Data Lab, Vuong & Associates, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam)

  • Quan-Hoang Vuong

    (Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University, Hanoi 100803, Vietnam)

Abstract

Open access (OA) publishing is beneficial for researchers to improve recognition, representation, and visibility in academia. However, few studies have been conducted for studying the association between gender and OA publishing likelihood. Therefore, the current study explores the impacts of gender-based authorship structures on OA publishing in Vietnamese social sciences and humanities. Bayesian analysis was performed on a dataset of 3122 publications in social sciences and humanities. We found that publications with mixed-gender authorship were most likely to be published under Gold Access terms (26.31–31.65%). In contrast, the likelihood of publications with the solely male or female author(s) was lower. It is also notable that if female researcher(s) held the first-author position in an article of mixed-gender authorship, the publication would be less likely to be published under Gold Access terms (26.31% compared to 31.65% of male-first-author structure). In addition, publications written by a solo female author (14.19%) or a group of female authors (10.72%) had lower OA publishing probabilities than those written by a solely male author(s) (17.14%). These findings hint at the possible advantage of gender diversity and the disadvantage of gender homophily (especially female-only authorship) on OA publishing likelihood. Moreover, they show there might be some negative impacts of gender inequality on OA publishing. As a result, the notion of gender diversity, financial and policy supports are recommended to promote the open science movement.

Suggested Citation

  • Huyen Thanh T. Nguyen & Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Tam-Tri Le & Manh-Toan Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2021. "Open Access Publishing Probabilities Based on Gender and Authorship Structures in Vietnam," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:45-:d:650318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/9/4/45/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/9/4/45/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kwiek, Marek & Roszka, Wojciech, 2021. "Gender-based homophily in research: A large-scale study of man-woman collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    2. Abdelghani Maddi & Yves Gingras, 2021. "Gender Diversity In Research Teams And Citation Impact In Economics And Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1381-1404, December.
    3. Roberta Ruggieri & Fabrizio Pecoraro & Daniela Luzi, 2021. "An intersectional approach to analyse gender productivity and open access: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian National Research Council," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1647-1673, February.
    4. Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2020. "Reform retractions to make them more transparent," Nature, Nature, vol. 582(7811), pages 149-149, June.
    5. Donna K. Ginther & Shulamit Kahn, 2004. "Women in Economics: Moving Up or Falling Off the Academic Career Ladder?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 193-214, Summer.
    6. Yimei Zhu, 2017. "Who support open access publishing? Gender, discipline, seniority and other factors associated with academics’ OA practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 557-579, May.
    7. Duc Hong Vo & Loan Thi-Hong Van & Dai Binh Tran & Tan Ngoc Vu & Chi Minh Ho, 2021. "The Determinants of Gender Income Inequality in Vietnam: A Longitudinal Data Analysis," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 198-222, January.
    8. Helen Shen, 2013. "Inequality quantified: Mind the gender gap," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7439), pages 22-24, March.
    9. Amanda Bayer & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 2016. "Diversity in the Economics Profession: A New Attack on an Old Problem," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 221-242, Fall.
    10. Junming Huang & Alexander J. Gates & Roberta Sinatra & Albert-László Barabási, 2020. "Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(9), pages 4609-4616, March.
    11. Dion, Michelle L. & Sumner, Jane Lawrence & Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, 2018. "Gendered Citation Patterns across Political Science and Social Science Methodology Fields," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 312-327, July.
    12. Erjia Yan & Chaojiang Wu & Min Song, 2018. "The funding factor: a cross-disciplinary examination of the association between research funding and citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 369-384, April.
    13. Hajar Sotudeh & Zahra Ghasempour & Maryam Yaghtin, 2015. "The citation advantage of author-pays model: the case of Springer and Elsevier OA journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 581-608, August.
    14. Marlène Koffi, 2021. "Gendered Citations at Top Economic Journals," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 60-64, May.
    15. Paul J. Boyle & Lucy K. Smith & Nicola J. Cooper & Kate S. Williams & Henrietta O'Connor, 2015. "Gender balance: Women are funded more fairly in social science," Nature, Nature, vol. 525(7568), pages 181-183, September.
    16. Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2019. "Breaking barriers in publishing demands a proactive attitude," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(10), pages 1034-1034, October.
    17. Michael Norris & Charles Oppenheim & Fytton Rowland, 2008. "The citation advantage of open‐access articles," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(12), pages 1963-1972, October.
    18. Faems, Dries & Subramanian, Annapoornima M., 2013. "R&D manpower and technological performance: The impact of demographic and task-related diversity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1624-1633.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katie Wilson & Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang & Lucy Montgomery & Cameron Neylon & Rebecca N. Handcock & Alkim Ozaygen & Aniek Roelofs, 2022. "Changing the Academic Gender Narrative through Open Access," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Le, Tam-Tri, 2022. "Planning for a new mindsponge-based methodological book," OSF Preprints bwz59, Center for Open Science.
    3. Mindsponge, AISDL, 2022. "Release of guide for bayesvl version 1.0," OSF Preprints rs3zb, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Salim Sazzed, 2021. "Association between the Rankings of Top Bioinformatics and Medical Informatics Journals and the Scholarly Reputations of Chief Editors," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Davies, Benjamin, 2022. "Gender sorting among economists: Evidence from the NBER," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    3. Shen, Hongquan & Cheng, Ying & Ju, Xiufang & Xie, Juan, 2022. "Rethinking the effect of inter-gender collaboration on research performance for scholars," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    4. Nakajima, Kazuki & Liu, Ruodan & Shudo, Kazuyuki & Masuda, Naoki, 2023. "Quantifying gender imbalance in East Asian academia: Research career and citation practice," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    5. Liu, Meijun & Zhang, Ning & Hu, Xiao & Jaiswal, Ajay & Xu, Jian & Chen, Hong & Ding, Ying & Bu, Yi, 2022. "Further divided gender gaps in research productivity and collaboration during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from coronavirus-related literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    6. Koffi, Marlene, 2021. "Innovative ideas and gender inequality," CLEF Working Paper Series 35, Canadian Labour Economics Forum (CLEF), University of Waterloo.
    7. Andrew Hussey & Sheena Murray & Wendy Stock, 2022. "Gender, coauthorship, and academic outcomes in economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(2), pages 465-484, April.
    8. Katie Wilson & Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang & Lucy Montgomery & Cameron Neylon & Rebecca N. Handcock & Alkim Ozaygen & Aniek Roelofs, 2022. "Changing the Academic Gender Narrative through Open Access," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, July.
    9. Vuong, Quan-Hoang & Huyen, Nguyen Thanh Thanh & Pham, Thanh-Hang & Phuong, Luong Anh & Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2020. "Mapping the intellectual and conceptual structure of research on gender issues in the family business: A bibliometric review," OSF Preprints jgnrw, Center for Open Science.
    10. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2020. "Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(1), pages 269-327.
    11. Iturrieta Reyes, Paula, 2021. "Mujeres Economistas y Publicaciones. Diagnóstico Cualitativo de Mujeres Economistas y sus Publicaciones en Chile," Documentos de Trabajo 9, Estudios Nueva Economía.
    12. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Tam-Tri Le & Viet-Phuong La & Huyen Thanh Thanh Nguyen & Manh-Toan Ho & Quy Khuc & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2022. "Covid-19 vaccines production and societal immunization under the serendipity-mindsponge-3D knowledge management theory and conceptual framework," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    13. Biermann, Marcus, 2024. "Remote talks: Changes to economics seminars during COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    14. Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & María Inés Moraes & Tatiana Pérez, 2021. "Women in Research in Economics in Uruguay," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 40(84), pages 763-790, October.
    15. Schmal, W. Benedikt & Haucap, Justus & Knoke, Leon, 2023. "The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    16. Nan L. Maxwell & Nathan Wozny, "undated". "Gender Gaps in Time Use and Earnings: What's Norms Got to Do With It?," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 38f127bf7f494794807db7a3a, Mathematica Policy Research.
    17. Markus Eberhardt & Giovanni Facchini & Valeria Rueda, 2023. "Gender Differences in Reference Letters: Evidence from the Economics Job Market," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(655), pages 2676-2708.
    18. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2021. "Lecture 1: Phân tích dữ liệu xã hội sử dụng BMF, MCMC và bayesvl với ngôn ngữ R," OSF Preprints s9rq7, Center for Open Science.
    19. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2022. "Gender Differences in Peer Recognition by Economists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(5), pages 1937-1971, September.
    20. Sierminska, Eva & Oaxaca, Ronald L., 2022. "Gender differences in economics PhD field specializations with correlated choices," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:45-:d:650318. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.