IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0273291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Brazilian female researchers do not publish less despite an academic structure that deepens sex gap

Author

Listed:
  • Juliana Hipólito
  • Leila Teruko Shirai
  • Rosana Halinski
  • Aline Sartori Guidolin
  • Ranyse Barbosa Querino
  • Eliane Dias Quintela
  • Nivia da Silva Dias Pini
  • Carmen Sílvia Soares Pires
  • Eliana Maria Gouveia Fontes

Abstract

In the 21st century, we still need to talk about gender inequality in science. Even with the sharp growth of studies on this theme over the last decades, we are still trying to convince our peers that diversity matters and, if embraced, makes better science. Part of this drawback can be related to the need for data to support effective proposals to change the academic scenario. In order to close some of those gaps, we here analyze 1) the profile of Brazilian researchers based on production, impact, and membership to the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, 2) participation in the Editorial boards of Brazilian journals dedicated to Entomology, and, 3) the academic scenario of Brazilian Entomology focusing on the sex of the first and last authors in peer-reviewed international publications related to Entomology. We aimed to provide a deeper look on the Brazilian Entomology scenario and to expand the amount of data availability to stimulate and foster a mind-change in the current academic structure. We performed scientometric searches and analysis using different platforms and found that the number and impact of the publications by female researchers, as observed by relative numbers, are not less than that of males. Despite that, female researchers are less represented at the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and editorial boards, reinforcing the lack of women recognition in science. Thus, we observe that some narratives related to the productivity gap can be misleading to a perpetuation of our internal and structural biases. We here expanded data from a previous paper where we scrutinized the Brazilian Entomology scenario and discussed the patches and systems that maintain gender gap in science.

Suggested Citation

  • Juliana Hipólito & Leila Teruko Shirai & Rosana Halinski & Aline Sartori Guidolin & Ranyse Barbosa Querino & Eliane Dias Quintela & Nivia da Silva Dias Pini & Carmen Sílvia Soares Pires & Eliana Maria, 2022. "Brazilian female researchers do not publish less despite an academic structure that deepens sex gap," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-17, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0273291
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0273291
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0273291&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0273291?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. Julie Fortin & Bjarne Bartlett & Michael Kantar & Michelle Tseng & Zia Mehrabi, 2021. "Digital technology helps remove gender bias in academia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4073-4081, May.
    2. Sarah W Davies & Hollie M Putnam & Tracy Ainsworth & Julia K Baum & Colleen B Bove & Sarah C Crosby & Isabelle M Côté & Anne Duplouy & Robinson W Fulweiler & Alyssa J Griffin & Torrance C Hanley & Tes, 2021. "Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-15, 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. 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. Gregor Wolbring, 2022. "Auditing the ‘Social’ of Quantum Technologies: A Scoping Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-38, March.
    3. Tekwa, EW & Giles, Rachel K & Davis, Alexandra CD, 2022. "Theoretical foundation and empirical assessment of representation and meritocracy in academia," SocArXiv 4bd9r_v1, Center for Open Science.
    4. Roberto Efraín Díaz & Stephanie A Wankowicz, 2024. "Ten recommendations for hosting a Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice (DEIJ) journal club," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(6), pages 1-10, June.
    5. Anastasia Rogova & Isabel Martinez Leal & Maggie Britton & Shine Chang & Kamisha H. Escoto & Kayce D. Solari Williams & Crystal Roberson & Lorna H. McNeill & Lorraine R. Reitzel, 2022. "Promoting Cancer Health Equity: A Qualitative Study of Mentee and Mentor Perspectives of a Training Program for Underrepresented Scholars in Cancer Health Disparities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-22, June.
    6. Jason A Papin & Jessica Keim-Malpass & Sana Syed, 2022. "Ten simple rules for launching an academic research career," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(12), pages 1-6, December.
    7. Wei Fu & Shin-Yi Chou & Li-San Wang, 2022. "NIH Grant Expansion, Ancestral Diversity and Scientific Discovery in Genomics Research," NBER Working Papers 30155, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Brielle Lillywhite & Gregor Wolbring, 2022. "Emergency and Disaster Management, Preparedness, and Planning (EDMPP) and the ‘Social’: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-50, October.
    9. Gregor Wolbring & Maria Escobedo, 2023. "Academic Coverage of Social Stressors Experienced by Disabled People: A Scoping Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-31, September.
    10. Erin V Satterthwaite & Valeriya Komyakova & Natalia G Erazo & Louise Gammage & Gabriel A Juma & Rachel Kelly & Daniel Kleinman & Delphine Lobelle & Rachel Sapery James & Norlaila Binti Mohd Zanuri, 2022. "Five actionable pillars to engage the next generation of leaders in the co-design of transformative ocean solutions," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(10), pages 1-14, October.
    11. Fernanda Staniscuaski & Arthur V. Machado & Rossana C. Soletti & Fernanda Reichert & Eugenia Zandonà & Pamela B. Mello-Carpes & Camila Infanger & Zelia M. C. Ludwig & Leticia Oliveira, 2023. "Bias against parents in science hits women harder," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    12. Stefano Mammola & Elena Piano & Alberto Doretto & Enrico Caprio & Dan Chamberlain, 2022. "Measuring the influence of non-scientific features on citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4123-4137, July.
    13. Marcus Goncalves & Suela Papagelis & Daphne Nicolitsas, 2025. "Drivers for Women Entrepreneurship in Greece: A Case Analysis of Early-Stage Companies," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-38, January.
    14. Simerta Gill & Gregor Wolbring, 2022. "Auditing the ‘Social’ Using Conventions, Declarations, and Goal Setting Documents: A Scoping Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-100, October.
    15. Gregor Wolbring & Aspen Lillywhite, 2023. "Burnout through the Lenses of Equity/Equality, Diversity and Inclusion and Disabled People: A Scoping Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-31, May.
    16. González-Betancor, Sara M. & Dorta-González, Pablo, 2023. "Does society show differential attention to researchers based on gender and field?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).

    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:pone00:0273291. 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.