|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Lui, P. Priscilla (Southern Methodist University); Gobrial, Sarah; Pham, Savannah; Adams, Niki; Giadolor, Westley; Rollock, David (Purdue University) |
| Abstract: | Objectives: There are two potentially useful but nonintersecting efforts to ensure that psychological science is valid and credible, and helps understand the diversity of human experiences. Whereas American ethnic minority psychology/cultural diversity (EM/D) research focuses on culturally competent, contextual psychological understanding of understudied and underserved populations, current open science (OS) approaches emphasize material and data sharing, and statistical proficiency to maximize replicability of mainstream findings. Three studies illuminated the extent and reasons for this bifurcation, and OS’s potential impact on EM/D research. Methods and Results: In Study 1, we reviewed the editorial/publishing policies and articles appearing in four major EM/D journals on the degrees of support for and use of OS. Journals varied in policies; 32 of 823 empirical articles incorporated any OS practices. Study 2 was a national mixed methods survey of EM/D researchers’ (N=141) and journal editors’ (N=15) views about and use of OS practices. Editors were more familiar with and accepting of OS practices than researchers. Themes emerged about the perceived impact of OS on scientific quality, possible professional disadvantages for EM/D researchers, and concerns about the welfare of and ethical risks posed for participants of color. In Study 3, we explored research participants’ beliefs about data sharing and the credibility of science/scientists (N=1,104). Participants reported accepting attitudes toward OS-recommended data sharing, and favorable views about psychological science. Conclusions: We provide data-driven recommendations for all researchers to assemble the best tools for engaging in culturally competent and transparent research and in generating valid and useful knowledge. |
| Date: | 2021–05–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:em9ua&r= |
| By: | Enrico Nano (IHEID, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva); Ugo Panizza (IHEID, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva); Martina Viarengo (IHEID, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva) |
| Abstract: | We examine the role of financial aid in shaping the formation of human capital in economics. Specifically, we study the impact of a large merit-based scholarship for graduate studies in affecting individuals' occupational choices, career trajectories, and labor market outcomes of a generation of Italian economists with special focus on gender gaps and the role of social mobility. We construct a unique dataset that combines archival sources and includes microdata for the universe of applicants to the scholarship program and follow these individuals over their professional life. Our unique sample that focuses on the high end of the talent and ability distribution also allows us to analyze the characteristics of top graduates, a group which tends to be under-sampled in most surveys. We discuss five main results. First, women are less likely to be shortlisted for a scholarship as they tend to receive lower scores in the most subjective criteria used in the initial screening of candidates. Second, scholarship winners are much more likely to choose a research career and this effect is larger for women. Third, women who work in Italian universities tend to have less citations than men who work in Italy. However, the citation gender gap is smaller for candidates who received a scholarship. Fourth, women take longer to be promoted to the rank of full professor, even after controlling for academic productivity. Fifth, it is easier to become a high achiever for individuals from households with a lower socio-economic status if they reside in high social mobility provinces. However, high-achievers from lower socio-economic status households face an up-hill battle even in high social mobility provinces. |
| Keywords: | Human capital formation, Financial aid, Career trajectories, Gender gaps |
| JEL: | I22 I24 J16 J24 |
| Date: | 2021–05–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gii:giihei:heidwp08-2021&r= |
| By: | Ductor, Lorenzo; Goyal, Sanjeev; Prummer, Anja |
| Abstract: | We connect gender disparities in research output and collaboration patterns in economics. We first document large gender gaps in research output. These gaps persist across 50 years despite a significant increase in the fraction of women in economics during that time. We further show that output differences are closely related to differences in the co-authorship networks of men and women: women have fewer collaborators, collaborate more often with the same co-authors, and a higher fraction of their co-authors collaborate with each other. Taking into account co-authorship networks reduces the gender output gap by 18%. |
| Date: | 2021–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:15673&r= |