IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v67y2013i04p889-922_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Gender Citation Gap in International Relations

Author

Listed:
  • Maliniak, Daniel
  • Powers, Ryan
  • Walter, Barbara F.

Abstract

This article investigates the extent to which citation and publication patterns differ between men and women in the international relations (IR) literature. Using data from the Teaching, Research, and International Policy project on peer-reviewed publications between 1980 and 2006, we show that women are systematically cited less than men after controlling for a large number of variables including year of publication, venue of publication, substantive focus, theoretical perspective, methodology, tenure status, and institutional affiliation. These results are robust to a variety of modeling choices. We then turn to network analysis to investigate the extent to which the gender of an article's author affects that article's relative centrality in the network of citations between papers in our sample. Articles authored by women are systematically less central than articles authored by men, all else equal. This is likely because (1) women tend to cite themselves less than men, and (2) men (who make up a disproportionate share of IR scholars) tend to cite men more than women. This is the first study in political science to reveal significant gender differences in citation patterns and is especially meaningful because citation counts are increasingly used as a key measure of research's quality and impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Maliniak, Daniel & Powers, Ryan & Walter, Barbara F., 2013. "The Gender Citation Gap in International Relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 889-922, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:67:y:2013:i:04:p:889-922_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818313000209/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Beaudry, Catherine & Larivière, Vincent, 2016. "Which gender gap? Factors affecting researchers’ scientific impact in science and medicine," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1790-1817.
    2. Guenther, Isabel & Grosse, Melanie & Klasen, Stephan, 2014. "Attracting Attentive Academics. Paper, Person or Place?," Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100392, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. repec:spr:scient:v:111:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2330-1 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Clément Bosquet & Pierre‐Philippe Combes & Cecilia García‐Peñalosa, 2019. "Gender and Promotions: Evidence from Academic Economists in France," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 1020-1053, July.
    5. Pritchard, Annette & Morgan, Nigel, 2017. "Tourism’s lost leaders: Analysing gender and performance," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 34-47.
    6. repec:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:3:p:950-959 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:eee:respol:v:46:y:2017:i:5:p:911-924 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Epifanio, Mariaelisa & Troeger, Vera E, 2013. "How much do children really cost? Maternity benefits and career opportunities of women in academia," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 171, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. Sandra Krapf & Michaela Kreyenfeld & Katharina Wolf, 2016. "Gendered Authorship and Demographic Research: An Analysis of 50 Years of Demography," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(4), pages 1169-1184, August.
    10. repec:spr:scient:v:112:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2392-0 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:bla:germec:v:18:y:2017:i:4:p:468-491 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Iman Tahamtan & Askar Safipour Afshar & Khadijeh Ahamdzadeh, 2016. "Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1195-1225, June.
    13. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:2:p:478-491 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. repec:spr:scient:v:111:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2327-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:74-86 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Epifanio, Mariaelisa & Troeger, Vera E., 2018. "Maternity leaves in Academia : Why are some UK universities more generous than others?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1158, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    17. repec:spr:scient:v:105:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1757-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:spr:jenvss:v:8:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s13412-017-0448-3 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. repec:oup:oxecpp:v:69:y:2017:i:4:p:986-1009. is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2903-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Epifanio, Mariaelisa & Troeger, Vera E., 2018. "Maternity leaves in Academia: Why are some UK universities more generous than others?," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 365, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    22. Isabel Günther & Melanie Grosse & Stephan Klasen, 2017. "How to Attract an Audience at a Conference: Paper, Person or Place?," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 18(4), pages 468-491, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:intorg:v:67:y:2013:i:04:p:889-922_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keith Waters). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.