IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v124y2020i1d10.1007_s11192-020-03427-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Large sex difference despite equal opportunity: authorship of over 3000 letters in exercise science and physical therapy journals over 56 years

Author

Listed:
  • James L. Nuzzo

Abstract

Letters to editors of journals are a hallmark of scientific debate and communication. Incidentally, letters also serve as a relatively unconfounded model to test for a potential sex difference in scientific engagement because opportunity to write letters is equal. When studied in exercise science and physical therapy journals, the model is strengthened because these fields have higher numbers of female degree earners. The purpose of the current study was to determine if, despite equal opportunity, there is a sex difference in authorship of letters written to scientific journals. An inventory of letters written to 27 exercise science and physical therapy journals from 1963 to 2018 was created. Sex of the sole or first author was determined by first name or internet searches for the author’s photograph or biography. The search discovered 3203 letters. Author sex was determined for 3021 letters. Males authored 86% of letters; females authored 14%. Males authored more letters than females in all 27 journals and in every year except 1964. Thirty males authored five or more letters over the 56-years period. Only two females authored five or more letters. Exploratory analyses with Chi-square tests revealed the author’s sex was not associated with the editor’s sex. The results suggest males might “lean in” more than females to discuss and critique science publicly. This sex difference in letter writing might be due to psychological differences between the sexes—males are generally less agreeable, more competitive, and higher risk takers than females. However, such hypotheses remain to be tested.

Suggested Citation

  • James L. Nuzzo, 2020. "Large sex difference despite equal opportunity: authorship of over 3000 letters in exercise science and physical therapy journals over 56 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 679-695, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:124:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03427-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03427-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03427-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-020-03427-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frietsch, Rainer & Haller, Inna & Funken-Vrohlings, Melanie & Grupp, Hariolf, 2009. "Gender-specific patterns in patenting and publishing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 590-599, May.
    2. Heather L. Ford & Cameron Brick & Karine Blaufuss & Petra S. Dekens, 2018. "Gender inequity in speaking opportunities at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-6, December.
    3. Jory Lerback & Brooks Hanson, 2017. "Journals invite too few women to referee," Nature, Nature, vol. 541(7638), pages 455-457, January.
    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. James L. Nuzzo, 2021. "Letters to the editor in exercise science and physical therapy journals: an examination of content and “authorship inflation”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6917-6936, August.

    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. Antonio De Nicola & Gregorio D’Agostino, 2021. "Assessment of gender divide in scientific communities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3807-3840, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Nicolas Carayol & Elodie Carpentier, 2022. "The spread of academic invention: a nationwide case study on French data (1995–2012)," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1395-1421, October.
    4. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2021. "The impact of public funding on science valorisation: an analysis of the ERC Proof-of-Concept Programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    5. Edoardo Ferrucci & Francesco Lissoni & Ernest Miguelez, 2020. "Coming from afar and picking a man’s job:Women immigrant inventors in the United States," Working Papers hal-03098102, HAL.
    6. 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.
    7. Jung, Taehyun & Ejermo, Olof, 2014. "Demographic patterns and trends in patenting: Gender, age, and education of inventors," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 110-124.
    8. Farhat Chowdhury & Albert N. Link & Anne Beeson Royalty, 2023. "Gender and innovation at the US National Institutes of Health," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(4), pages 1543-1553, December.
    9. Zhang, Lin & Shang, Yuanyuan & HUANG, Ying & Sivertsen, Gunnar, 2021. "Gender differences among active reviewers: an investigation based on Publons," SocArXiv 4z6w8, Center for Open Science.
    10. Torsten Skov, 2020. "Unconscious Gender Bias in Academia: Scarcity of Empirical Evidence," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Francesco Rosati, 2016. "Gender bias in academic recruitment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 119-141, January.
    13. Meng, Yu, 2016. "Collaboration patterns and patenting: Exploring gender distinctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 56-67.
    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. Hamzehali Nourmohammadi & Fateme Hodaei, 2014. "Perspective of Iranian women’s scientific production in high priority fields of science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1455-1471, February.
    16. Jenine K Harris & Merriah A Croston & Ellen T Hutti & Amy A Eyler, 2020. "Diversify the syllabi: Underrepresentation of female authors in college course readings," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.
    17. Ana Vila-Concejo & Shari L. Gallop & Sarah M. Hamylton & Luciana S. Esteves & Karin R. Bryan & Irene Delgado-Fernandez & Emilia Guisado-Pintado & Siddhi Joshi & Graziela Miot Silva & Amaia Ruiz de Ale, 2018. "Steps to improve gender diversity in coastal geoscience and engineering," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    18. Caviggioli, Federico & Colombelli, Alessandra & Ravetti, Chiara, 2022. "Peers and stars: the role of gender among coinventors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 202217, University of Turin.
    19. Yu Meng, 2018. "Gender distinctions in patenting: Does nanotechnology make a difference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 971-992, March.
    20. Paola Giuri & Rosa Grimaldi & Anna Kochenkova & Federico Munari & Laura Toschi, 2020. "The effects of university-level policies on women’s participation in academic patenting in Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 122-150, February.

    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:spr:scient:v:124:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03427-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.