The examination of gender disparities in scientific research productivity among university faculty worldwide is crucial for advancing both gender equality and scientific progress. This study selected faculty members from 60 iSchools institutions across North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. By analysing their CV information and research paper data from the Web of Science (WoS) database within the Library and Information Science (LIS) field, the study comprehensively examined gender differences in research output among faculty members from different regions, focusing on both paper output volume and citation frequency. The research indicated that North American faculty members significantly outperform their counterparts in other regions across both indicators of research output. Meanwhile, the Asia-Pacific region exhibits the most pronounced gender disparity in research output among faculty. Furthermore, the distribution of research output across all three regions followed a pyramid structure, with the vast majority of faculty concentrated in the low-publication and low-citation brackets. The study also revealed that educational background partially explains gender differences in research output among faculty in North America. In Europe, academic qualifications and institutional background were the primary factors driving gender disparities in paper output volume. In the Asia-Pacific region, institutional background emerged as the key common factor influencing research output. Notably, significant moderating effects were found only in the context of North America. Academic qualifications and professional titles significantly increased the paper output volume, especially among men faculty. In contrast, institutional background revealed notable gender differences in its effect on citation frequency.
XieYShaumanKA. Sex differences in research productivity: new evidence about an old puzzle. Am Sociol Review1998; 63(6): 847–870.
6.
ColeJColeS. Social stratification in science. Beijing: Huaxia Publishing House, 1989.
7.
ColeJZuekermanH. The productivity puzzle: persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. In: MaehrPSteinkmapMW (eds) Advances in Motivation and Achievement. Greenwich: JAI Press, 1984, pp. 217–258.
8.
AbramoGD’AngeloCACapraseccaA. Gender differences in research productivity: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian academic system. Scientometrics2009; 79(3): 517–539.
9.
LarivièreVVignola-GagnéEVilleneuveC, et al. Sex differences in research funding, productivity and impact: an analysis of Québec university professors. Scientometrics2011; 87(3): 483–498.
10.
Moss-RacusinCADovidioJFBrescollVL, et al. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proc Natl Acad Sci2012; 109(41): 16474–16479.
11.
ChanHFTorglerB. Gender differences in performance of top cited scientists by field and country. Scientometrics2020; 125(3): 2421–2447.
12.
HuangJMGatesAJSinatraR, et al. Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2020; 117(9): 4609–4616.
13.
TanCHWangHXWangYWL, et al. Gender differences in research output of university teachers in library, information and archives management. Library Tribune2023; 43(9): 65–75 (in Chinese).
14.
AbramoGAksnesDWD’AngeloCA. Gender differences in research performance within and between countries: Italy vs Norway. J Inform2021; 15(2): 101144.
15.
TóthJJHálóGGoyanesM. Beyond views, productivity, and citations: measuring geopolitical differences of scientific impact in communication research. Scientometrics2023; 128(10): 5705–5729.
16.
HamlinSGustafssonM. Research production in the arts and humanities – a questionnaire study of factors influencing research performance. Scientometrics1996; 37(3): 417–432.
17.
KyvikSTeigenM. Child care, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity. Sci Tech Human Values1996; 21(1): 54–71.
18.
QinPHZhaoLXWanJB. Gender differences in the commercialization of academic achievements and its influencing factors. Stud Sci Science2020; 38(3): 401–408; 417 (in Chinese).
19.
YuanYZ. Gender difference in scientific research output of university teachers and its causes: based on the experience of education teachers in a research-oriented university. Higher Educ Explor2017; 3: 5–12 (in Chinese).
20.
ZhuYNHeGX. Gender differences in academic output: a social network analysis perspective. Chin J Socio2016; 36(4): 76–102 (in Chinese).
21.
ChenSJJiangWSKangWH, et al. A study on the influencing factors of paper citation frequency. J Inform Sci2020; 39(5): 83–88 (in Chinese).
22.
LiangWYZhouYX. Social capital, cooperation and ‘The mystery of scientific research productivity’– Based on the experience of teachers in China’s research universities. Peking Univers Educ Rev2016; 14(2): 133–156; 191 (in Chinese).
23.
YuLPChenKL. Does the gender of the author influence the citation frequency? – Take journal of intelligence as an example. Evaluat Manag2022; 20(1): 1–5 (in Chinese).
24.
ColeJColeS. Fair Science: Women in the Scientific Community. New York: Free Press, 1987.
25.
RosenfeldRAJonesJA. Institutional mobility among academics: the case of psychologists. Soc Educ1986; 59(4): 212–226.
26.
LongJS. Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces1992; 71(1): 159–178.
27.
ArensbergenPVWeijdenIVDBesselaarPVD. Gender differences in scientific productivity: a persisting phenomenon?Scientometrics2012; 93(3): 857–868.
28.
GargKCKumarS. Scientometric profile of Indian scientific output in life sciences with a focus on the contributions of women scientists. Scientometrics2014; 98(3): 1771–1783.
29.
LiCFChenHJ. Do female doctoral students perform better or worse than male doctoral students? – An analysis based on the data of national doctoral graduates survey. J Grad Educ2021; 1: 63–71; 84 (in Chinese).
30.
JamaliHRAbbasiA. Gender gaps in Australian research publishing, citation and co-authorship. Scientometrics2023; 128(5): 2879–2893.
31.
ThelwallM. Gender differences in citation impact for 27 fields and six English-speaking countries 1996–2014. Quant Sci Stud2020; 1(2): 599–617.
32.
AndersenJPNielsenMW. Google scholar and web of science: examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines. Informetrics2018; 12(3): 950–959.
33.
BorsukRMBuddenAELeimuR, et al. The influence of author gender, national language and number of authors on citation rate in ecology. Open Ecol J2009; 2: 25–28.
34.
ThelwallMNevillT. No evidence of citation bias as a determinant of STEM gender disparities in US biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology research. Scientometrics2019; 121(3): 1793–1801.
35.
OverR. The scholarly impact of articles published by men and women in psychology journals. Scientometrics1990; 18(5): 331–340.
36.
LutterMSchröderM. Is there a motherhood penalty in academia? The gendered effect of children on academic publications in German sociology. Europ Soc Review2020; 36(3): 442–459.
37.
SunYJ. Analysis of the current status of women in scientific research from a gender perspective in universities. J Hohai Univers2012; 14(3): 45–4890 (in Chinese).
38.
MorganACWaySFHoeferMJD, et al. The unequal impact of parenthood in academia. Sci Adv2021; 7(9): eabd1996.
39.
ChenL. Research on the influence of background characteristics of scientific research scholars on paper output: taking the field of library and information science as an example, Shandong Normal University, Shandong, China, 2021 (in Chinese).
40.
MaR. Analysis of gender differences in the growth trajectory and influencing factors of outstanding researchers in China: taking economics and computer science as examples, Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, Shanxi, China, 2021 (in Chinese).
41.
MayerSJRathmannJMK. How does research productivity relate to gender? Analyzing gender differences for multiple publication dimensions. Scientometrics2018; 117(3): 1663–1693.
42.
GuoCBSunQM. A comparative analysis of mainland Chinese universities and world-class universities: from the perspective of university rankings. Educ Res2015; 36(2): 147–157 (in Chinese).
43.
YanJWangH. Status and influence factors for female sport researcher’s output-taking the researchers who published papers in sport science 2000-2015 for example. J Shanghai Univers Sport2017; 41(5): 42–48 (in Chinese).
44.
CuiLW. Review of the researchers’ gender stratification of scientific research output and influence. Stud Sci Science2021; 39(7): 1239–1247 (in Chinese).
45.
BlandCJCenterBAFinstadDA, et al. A theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research productivity. Acad Med2005; 80(3): 225–237.
46.
DuchJZengXHSales-PardoM, et al. The possible role of resource requirements and academic career-choice risk on gender differences in publication rate and impact. PLoS ONE2012; 7(12): e51332.
47.
LiYLiHLiuN, et al. Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science. Scientometrics2018; 117(1): 85–103.
48.
VieiraESGomesJANF. Citations to scientific articles: its distribution and dependence on the article features. Informetrics2010; 4(1): 1–13.
49.
YuLP. Research on the relationship between paper length and citation frequency under the decline of papers. Inform Stud Theory Appl2020; 43(10): 50–54 (in Chinese).
50.
KonkielS. The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention. Idealis2015; 103(2): 555–564.
51.
DidegahFThelwallM. Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Assoc Inf Sci Technol2013; 64(5): 1055–1064.
52.
DuanYFLiuJRBuK. Periodical characteristic and the cited frequency relations research. Inform Doc Service2018; 2: 13–18 (in Chinese).
53.
GoyanesMDemeterMHálóG, et al. Geographical and gender inequalities in health sciences studies: testing differences in research productivity, impact and visibility. Online Inform Review2024; 48(4): 803–822.
54.
TóthJDemeterM. Prestige and independence-controlled publication performance of researchers at 14 Hungarian research institutions between 2014 and 2018 – a data paper. KOME2021; 9(1): 41–63.
55.
ThelwallM. Female citation impact superiority 1996-2018 in six out of seven English-speaking nations. J Assoc Inform Sci Tech2020; 71(8): 979–990.
56.
FranzoniCScellatoGStephanP. The mover’s advantage: the superior performance of migrant scientists. Econ Lett2014; 122(1): 89–93.
57.
LeeLCLinPHChuangYW, et al. Research output and economic productivity: a Granger causality test. Scientometrics2011; 89(2): 465–478.
58.
LarivièreVNiCGingrasY, et al. Bibliometrics: global gender disparities in science. Nature2013; 504(7479): 211–213.
59.
El-OuahiJLarivièreV. On the lack of women researchers in the Middle East and North Africa. Scientometrics2023; 128(8): 4321–4348.
60.
SongYHZhuLShuF, et al. The comparative study on the interdisciplinary development of doctoral dissertation topics in library and information science between China and the United States. J China Soc Sci Tech Inform2022; 41(5): 536–548 (in Chinese).
61.
ZhangXN. Bibliometric analysis on the academic age of scholars library and information science based on Chinese core journals. Inform Res2019; 1: 62–66 (in Chinese).
62.
Elsevier. Gender in the global research landscape. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2017.
63.
FrandsenTFJacobsenRHOusagerJ. Gender gaps in scientific performance: a longitudinal matching study of health sciences researchers. Scientometrics2020; 124(2): 1511–1527.
64.
CeciSJGintherDKKahnS, et al. Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychol Sci Public Interest2014; 15(3): 75–141.
65.
ChaY. Overwork and the persistence of gender segregation in occupations. Gender Soc2013; 27(2): 158–184.
66.
MasonMAWolfingerNHGouldenM. Do Babies Matter? Gender and Family in the Ivory Tower. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2013.
67.
Van Den BrinkMBenschopY. Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: sheep with five legs. Organization2012; 19(4): 507–524.
68.
RossMBGlennonBMMurciano-GoroffR, et al. Women are credited less in science than men. Nature2022; 608(7921): 135–145.
