EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Gender differences in scientific productivity and visibility in core neurosurgery journals: Citations and social media metrics

Hajar Sotudeh, Tahereh Dehdarirad and Jonathan Freer

Research Evaluation, 2018, vol. 27, issue 3, 262-269

Abstract: Social media has provided new opportunities for both female and male academics to disseminate their research results, and presence on the Internet is found to increase the visibility of scholars. Thus, this study examined whether there were differences in terms of scientific productivity or the visibility (both in terms of citations and social media metrics) of female and male scholars in the field of neurosurgery. To do this, 11,127 articles and reviews from 2012 to 2014 were extracted from the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. This accounted for 14,944 unique authors. To study the visibility of neurosurgery scholars in terms of social media metrics, the following altmetric indicators were used: Mendeley readers, the post count of news, tweets, blogs, LinkedIn, and Facebook. The methodology and procedures employed included descriptive statistics, chi-square test, two-sample proportion test, and analysis of covariance. The results demonstrated that the number of female scholars was significantly lower compared to their male counterparts. Additionally, female neurosurgery scientists were found to be slightly less prolific in terms of scientific productivity. However, women were slightly more visible with regard to citations, readership, and tweets. Finally, both genders were similarly successful in terms of receiving mentions from blogs, news, Facebook, or LinkedIn.

Keywords: altmetrics; gender differences; neurosurgery; social media metrics; visibility (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvy003 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:3:p:262-269.

Access Statistics for this article

Research Evaluation is currently edited by Julia Melkers, Emanuela Reale and Thed van Leeuwen

More articles in Research Evaluation from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:3:p:262-269.