Despite a growing interest in gender differences in scientific careers, few studies have focused on the impact of research organization on researchers. This article offers a new approach to this issue by introducing bibliometric maps combined with sociological data and interviews, taking both the research organization and the experiences of the individual researcher into account. The results indicate that gender biases operate at various levels of the research organization and are often imbedded in seemingly gender-neutral processes and practices in the everyday working life of researchers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acker, J.1992. Gendering organizational theory. In Gendering organizational analysis, edited by A. J. Mills and P. Tancred, 248-261, London: Sage Ltd.
2.
Beaver, D.1986. Collaboration and teamwork in physics. Czechoslovak Journal of Physics1:14-18.
3.
Becher, T.1989. Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes: Society for Research into Higher Education.
4.
Callon, M., J. Law, and A. Rip. 1986. Qualitative scientometrics. In Mapping the dynamics of science and technology, edited by M. Callon, J. Law, and A. Rip, 103-123. London: Macmillan.
5.
Caplan, P. J.1994. Lifting a ton of feathers: A woman’s guide for surviving in the academic world. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
6.
Cockburn, C.1991. In the way of women. London: Macmillan.
7.
Cole, J., and B. Singer. 1991. A theory of limited differences: Explaining the productivity puzzle in science. In The outer circle: Women in the scientific community, edited by J. Cole, H. Zuckerman, and J. Bruer, 277-311. New York: Norton.
8.
Cole, J., and H. Zuckerman. 1991. Marriage, motherhood, and research performance. In The outer circle: Women in the scientific community, edited by J. Cole, H. Zuckerman, and J. Bruer, 159-169. New York: Norton.
9.
Collinson, D., and J. Hearn. 1994. Naming men as men: Implications for work, organization and management. Gender Work & Organization1 (1).
10.
Cozzens, S. E.1989. What do citations count? The rhetorical-first model. Scientomterics15:437-447.
11.
Cronin, B.1984. The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Chesham House.
12.
Davies, C.1996. The sociology of professions and the profession of gender. Journal of British Sociological Association30 (4): 661-678.
13.
Elgquist-Saltzman, I.1994. Straight roads and winding tracks. In Gender and education in a life perspective: Lessons from Scandinavia, edited by G. Bjeren and I. Elgquist-Saltzman, 7-17. Aldershot, England: Avebury.
14.
Garfield, E.1979. Citation indexing—Its theory and application in science, technology and humanities. New York: John Wiley.
15.
Gerholm, L., and Gerholm, T. 1992. Doktorshatten—En studie av forskarutbildningen inom sex discipliner vid Stockholms Universitet. Stockholm: Carlssons Bokförlag.
16.
Gherardi, S.1995. Gender, symbolism and organizational cultures. London: Sage Ltd.
17.
Hall, S.1997. Representation, cultural representations and signifying practices. London: Sage Ltd.
18.
Hicks, D., and J. Katz. 1996. Where is science going?Science, Technology & Human Values21 (4): 379-406.
19.
Kanter, R. M.1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
20.
Latour, B.1987. Science in action—How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
Lingren, G. 1985. Kamrater, Kollegor och Kvinnor. Umeå, Sweden: Sociologiska Institutionen Umeå Universitet.
23.
Lingren, G. 1996. Broderskapets logik. Kvinnovetenskaplig tidskrift 1:4-14.
24.
Long, J. S.1993. Women in science part 2. The impact enigma—why women biochemists papers are more cited than men’s. Current Comments. Institute for Scientific Information, 11 March, 259-269.
25.
Lundgren, B. 1996. Kön och genealogi. I Etnologisk ämneshistoria. In Att åtskilja och förena—etnologisk orskning om betydelser av kön. Stockholm: Carlsson Bokförlag.
26.
Luukkonen, T.1997. Why has Latour’s theory of citations been ignored by the bibliometric community? Discussion of sociological interpretations of citation analysis. Scientometrics38 (1): 27-37.
27.
Melin, G. 1997. Co-production of scientific knowledge—Research collaboration between countries, universities and individuals. Doctoral thesis at Umeå University, Department of Sociology, Umeå, Sweden.
28.
Merton, R. K., and Zuckerman, H.1973. Age, aging and age structure in science in the sociology of science (N. Storer, ed.). London: The University of Chicago Press.
29.
Narin, F., K. Stevens, and E. Withlow. 1991. Scientific co-production in Europe, and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics25 (2): 321-351.
30.
Peters, H.P. F., and A.F.J. VanRaan. 1991. Structuring scientific activity by co-author analysis—An exercise on a university faculty level. Scientometrics20:235-255.
31.
Price de la Solla, D. J., and D. B Beaver. 1966. Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist21 (1): 1011-1018.
32.
Sonnert, G., and G. Holton. 1995. Gender differences in scientific careers. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
33.
Stern, P.1996. Prisoners of the crystal palace—Mapping and understanding the social and cognitive organization of scientific research fields. Umeå, Sweden: Borea Bokförlag.
34.
Sthåle, B. 1996. Universiteten och forskarna—från stagnation till förnyelse. Nordiska Ministerrådet 39:327-38. (Nord: Köpenhamn.)
35.
Wahl, A. 1992. Könsstrukturer i organisationer—Kvinnliga civilekonomers och civilingenjörers karriärutveckling. Stockholm: Ekonomiska forskningsinstitutet Handelshögskolan.
36.
Wahl, A., C. Holgersson, and P. Höök. 1998. Ironi & Sexualitet om ledarskap och kön. Stockholm: Carlssons Bokförlag.
37.
West, C., and Zimmerman, D. H.1987. Doing gender. Gender and Society1:125-151.
38.
Ziman, J.1994. Prometheus bound: Science in a dynamic steady state. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
