IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0195298.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing gender discrimination and inequality in indie and traditional publishing

Author

Listed:
  • Dana B Weinberg
  • Adam Kapelner

Abstract

In traditional publishing, female authors’ titles command nearly half (45%) the price of male authors’ and are underrepresented in more prestigious genres, and books are published by publishing houses, which determined whose books get published, subject classification, and retail price. In the last decade, the growth of digital technologies and sales platforms have enabled unprecedented numbers of authors to bypass publishers to publish and sell books. The rise of indie publishing (aka self-publishing) reflects the growth of the “gig” economy, where the influence of firms has diminished and workers are exposed more directly to external markets. Encompassing the traditional and the gig economy, the book industry illuminates how the gig economy may disrupt, replicate, or transform the gender discrimination mechanisms and inequality found in the traditional economy. In a natural experiment spanning from 2002 to 2012 and including over two million book titles, we compare discrimination mechanisms and inequality in indie and traditional publishing. We find that indie publishing, though more egalitarian, largely replicates traditional publishing’s gender discrimination patterns, showing an unequal distribution of male and female authors by genre (allocative discrimination), devaluation of genres written predominantly by female authors (valuative discrimination), and lower prices within genres for books by female authors (within-job discrimination). However, these discrimination mechanisms are associated with far less price inequality in indie, only 7%, in large part due to the smaller and lower range of prices in indie publishing compared to traditional publishing. We conclude that, with greater freedom, workers in the gig economy may be inclined to greater equality but will largely replicate existing labor market segmentation and the lower valuation of female-typical work and of female workers. Nonetheless, price setting for work may be more similar for workers in the gig economy due to market competition that will compress prices ranges.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana B Weinberg & Adam Kapelner, 2018. "Comparing gender discrimination and inequality in indie and traditional publishing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0195298
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195298
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0195298
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0195298&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0195298?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jevin D West & Jennifer Jacquet & Molly M King & Shelley J Correll & Carl T Bergstrom, 2013. "The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-6, July.
    2. Nicolai T. Borgen, 2016. "Fixed effects in unconditional quantile regression," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 16(2), pages 403-415, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lin Zhang & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Gender differences among active reviewers: an investigation based on publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 145-179, January.
    2. Thanh‐Tung Nguyen & Trung Thanh Nguyen & Ulrike Grote, 2023. "Internet use and agricultural productivity in rural Vietnam," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 1309-1326, August.
    3. Chaojiang Wu & Erjia Yan & Yongjun Zhu & Kai Li, 2021. "Gender imbalance in the productivity of funded projects: A study of the outputs of National Institutes of Health R01 grants," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(11), pages 1386-1399, November.
    4. Sonia Bhalotra & Martin Karlsson & Therese Nilsson & Nina Schwarz, 2022. "Infant Health, Cognitive Performance, and Earnings: Evidence from Inception of the Welfare State in Sweden," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1138-1156, November.
    5. Wang, Wen & Lien, Donald, 2018. "Union membership, union coverage and wage dispersion of rural migrants: Evidence from Suzhou industrial sector," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 96-113.
    6. Michelle Maroto, 2018. "Saving, Sharing, or Spending? The Wealth Consequences of Raising Children," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(6), pages 2257-2282, December.
    7. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/65v9ag2jfn865abjgaljmq2qi9 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Thelwall, Mike & Bailey, Carol & Makita, Meiko & Sud, Pardeep & Madalli, Devika P., 2019. "Gender and research publishing in India: Uniformly high inequality?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 118-131.
    9. Josh Yamamoto & Eitan Frachtenberg, 2022. "Gender Differences in Collaboration Patterns in Computer Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Birgit Mellis & Patricia Soto & Chrystal D Bruce & Graciela Lacueva & Anne M Wilson & Rasitha Jayasekare, 2018. "Factors affecting the number and type of student research products for chemistry and physics students at primarily undergraduate institutions: A case study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Isis H Settles & Sheila T Brassel & Patricia A Soranno & Kendra Spence Cheruvelil & Georgina M Montgomery & Kevin C Elliott, 2019. "Team climate mediates the effect of diversity on environmental science team satisfaction and data sharing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, July.
    12. Ann-Maree Vallence & Mark R Hinder & Hakuei Fujiyama, 2019. "Data-driven selection of conference speakers based on scientific impact to achieve gender parity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, July.
    13. Kazuma Sato, 2021. "Relationship between marital status and body mass index in Japan," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 813-841, September.
    14. Stephanie Sardelis & Joshua A Drew, 2016. "Not “Pulling up the Ladder”: Women Who Organize Conference Symposia Provide Greater Opportunities for Women to Speak at Conservation Conferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Fengyuan Liu & Petter Holme & Matteo Chiesa & Bedoor AlShebli & Talal Rahwan, 2023. "Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 353-364, March.
    16. Frandsen, Tove Faber & Jacobsen, Rasmus Højbjerg & Wallin, Johan A. & Brixen, Kim & Ousager, Jakob, 2015. "Gender differences in scientific performance: A bibliometric matching analysis of Danish health sciences Graduates," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 1007-1017.
    17. Herman Sahni & Christian Nsiah & Bichaka Fayissa, 2021. "The African economic growth experience and tourism receipts: A threshold analysis and quantile regression approach," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(5), pages 915-932, August.
    18. Clément Bosquet & Pierre-Philippe Combes & Emeric Henry & Thierry Mayer, 2022. "Peer Effects in Academic Research: Senders and Receivers," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2644-2673.
    19. Cosmin Octavian Cepoi & Victor Dragotă & Ruxandra Trifan & Andreea Iordache, 2023. "Probability of informed trading during the COVID-19 pandemic: the case of the Romanian stock market," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-27, December.
    20. Kamila Kolpashnikova & Man-Yee Kan, 2020. "Unconditional Quantile Regression Approach: Effects of Education on Housework Time in the US and Japan," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    21. Gita Ghiasi & Matthew Harsh & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2018. "Inequality and collaboration patterns in Canadian nanotechnology: implications for pro-poor and gender-inclusive policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 785-815, May.

    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:plo:pone00:0195298. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.