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. Nicolai T. Borgen, 2016. "Fixed effects in unconditional quantile regression," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 16(2), pages 403-415, June.
    2. 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.
    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. Chen, Yutong, 2024. "Does the gig economy discriminate against women? Evidence from physicians in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2024. "Gender bias in team formation: the case of the European Science Foundation’s grants," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 247-260.
    8. repec:osf:socarx:w34pr_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Markowitz, Sara & Adams, E. Kathleen & Lewitt, Mary Jane & Dunlop, Anne L., 2017. "Competitive effects of scope of practice restrictions: Public health or public harm?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 201-218.
    12. Abramo, Giovanni & Cicero, Tindaro & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2015. "Should the research performance of scientists be distinguished by gender?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 25-38.
    13. repec:plo:pcbi00:1005134 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Helena Mihaljević-Brandt & Lucía Santamaría & Marco Tullney, 2016. "The Effect of Gender in the Publication Patterns in Mathematics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, October.
    15. Analia Schlosser & Yannay Shanan, 2025. "Fostering Soft Skills in Active Labor Market Programs: Evidence from a Large-Scale RCT," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(1), pages 1-36.
    16. Alexander Tekles & Katrin Auspurg & Lutz Bornmann, 2022. "Same-gender citations do not indicate a substantial gender homophily bias," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-12, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Hamid R. Jamali & Alireza Abbasi, 2023. "Gender gaps in Australian research publishing, citation and co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2879-2893, May.
    19. Damette, Olivier & Kouki, Imen, 2022. "Political influence and banking performance: Evidence from the African countries," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 200-207.
    20. Cepoi, Cosmin-Octavian & Anghel, Dan-Gabriel & Pop, Ionuţ Daniel, 2021. "Asymmetries and flight-to-safety effects in the price discovery process of cross-listed stocks," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 302-318.
    21. Segundo Camino-Mogro & Mary Armijos & Paul Vera-Gilces, 2022. "High-growth firms and international trade: evidence from Ecuador," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 299-332, January.
    22. Jong Wook Lee & Eunji Jeon & So Young Sohn, 2024. "Cosmetic patent and female invention," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(8), pages 1-22, August.

    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.