|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Deepa Dhume Datta; Nitzan Tzur-Ilan |
| Abstract: | To better understand the stalled progress of women in economics, we construct new data on women's representation and research output in one of the largest policy institutions—the Federal Reserve System. We document a slight increase in women’s representation over the past 20 years, in line with academic trends. We also document a significant gender gap in research output, especially for years in which economists have greater domestic responsibilities, but nearly absent gender gaps in policy output and career progression. This work complements existing research on women in academia, allowing a more comprehensive examination of progress in the economics profession. |
| Keywords: | Central banks; Diversity; Gender inequality; Leaky pipeline; Research output |
| JEL: | J16 A14 E58 |
| Date: | 2024–12–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fedgfe:2024-92 |
| By: | Singhal, Karan; Sierminska, Eva |
| Abstract: | This chapter presents evidence of the challenges faced by women and underrepresented minorities in Economics. It, first, examines the demographics of the economics profession, highlighting significant disparities in representation. Despite some progress, under representation remains prevalent at different educational levels and at higher academic positions, for the most part. Subsequently, the chapter reviews research on existing barriers and biases contributing to this under representation. Recent work has emphasized the crucial role of attitudes and institutional practices throughout the career pipeline. The chapter highlights evidence of these barriers across different stages of the academic journey, including research endeavors, publication processes, employment opportunities, and promotion and tenure considerations, as well as recent developments related to COVID-19 and the #MeToo movement, which have further influenced discussions on inclusivity and diversity in the field. This chapter underscores the continued need for collective efforts from the economics community to confront these barriers through targeted research and innovative interventions. By enhancing the experiences and opportunities for underrepresented academics, the field of economics could be enriched through fostering a broader range of perspectives, which could also facilitate a deeper understanding of complex societal issues. In line with this objective, the chapter also provides valuable data sources that researchers can utilize to investigate disparities and offer information about collectives and programs dedicated to promoting inclusivity and diversity through mentoring initiatives, research grants, and other forms of support. |
| Keywords: | gender, minorities, economics, tenure, promotion, COVID-19 |
| JEL: | A11 A20 J15 J16 |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:glodps:1536 |
| By: | Abramitzky, Ran (Stanford University, NBER); Greska, Lena (University of Munich); Pérez, Santiago (UC Davis, NBER); Price, Joseph (Brigham Young University (BYU), NBER); Schwarz, Carlo (Bocconi University, CEPR); Waldinger, Fabian (University of Munich, CEPR) |
| Abstract: | We explore how socio-economic background shapes academia, collecting the largest dataset of U.S. academics’ backgrounds and research output. Individuals from poorer backgrounds have been severely underrepresented for seven decades, especially in humanities and elite universities. Father’s occupation predicts professors’ discipline choice and, thus, the direction of research. While we find no differences in the average number of publications, academics from poorer backgrounds are both more likely to not publish and to have outstanding publication records. Academics from poorer backgrounds introduce more novel scientific concepts, but are less likely to receive recognition, as measured by citations, Nobel Prize nominations, and awards. |
| Keywords: | Academics, Socio-economic Background, Science, U.S. census JEL Classification: |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cge:wacage:739 |
| By: | Deepa Dhume Datta; Robert J. Vigfusson |
| Abstract: | Relative to diversity, inclusion is much harder to measure. We measure inclusion of women in economics using novel data on coauthoring relationships among Federal Reserve Board economists. Individual coauthoring relationships are voluntary, yet inclusion in coauthoring networks can be central to research productivity and career success. We document gender affinity in coauthoring, with individuals up to 34 percent more likely to have a same-gender coauthor in the data relative to what would be predicted by random assignment. Because women account for under 30 percent of Federal Reserve Board economists, gender affinity in coauthoring relationships may reduce research opportunities for women relative to their men peers. Whereas commonality of research interests is not sufficient to explain observed gender affinity in coauthoring, we find that paper outcomes may encourage gender affinity, in that papers authored by only men are more downloaded and more likely to be published than papers by mixed-gender teams. Gender affinity may contribute to the gender gap in authoring as well: women make up only 23 percent of authors in the later part of our sample, about 4 percentage points below their share of the economist population. We estimate that reducing gender affinity by men could eliminate between 1.5 to 3 percentage points of the gender gap in observed research output by women. Our findings on gender affinity in coauthoring provide an empirical assessment of the state of inclusivity in economics. |
| Keywords: | Central banks; Coauthoring networks; Diversity; Gender affinity; Inclusion; Leaky pipeline |
| JEL: | A14 J16 E58 |
| Date: | 2024–12–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fedgfe:2024-91 |
| By: | Ras-Carmona, Alvaro; Lafuente, Esther M.; Reche, Pedro A |
| Abstract: | xPromoting gender equality and excellence are key policies in academia. In this work, we studied scientific output and potential gender disparities in faculty positions at the Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), the largest academic institution in Spain. We found that women are clearly underrepresented in full professor positions despite being a majority in lower academic ranks. This gender disparity in full professor positions is however narrowing down in recent years. The scientific output of researches, as judged by the h-index, varied greatly between Faculties, but overall, correlated positively with the academic rank and no significant differences were detected between women and men, although exceptions were noted. Judging by the m-index, the scientific output of women and men in full professor positions were also alike. In sum, there is effective equality between genders within UCM faculty ranks. |
| Date: | 2025–01–03 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:gfecv |
| By: | Alabrese, Eleonora (University of Bath, CAGE and SAFE); Capozza, Francesco (WZB Berlin, BSoE, and CESifo); Garg, Prashant (Imperial College London) |
| Abstract: | As social media is increasingly popular, we examine the reputational costs of its increased centrality among academics. Analyzing posts of 98, 000 scientists on Twitter (2016-2022) reveals substantial and varied political discourse. We assess the impact of such online political expression with online experiments on a representative sample of 3, 700 U.S. respondents and 135 journalists who rate vignettes of synthetic academic profiles with varied political affiliations. Politically neutral scientists are viewed as the most credible. Strikingly, on both the 'left' and 'right' sides of politically neutral, there is a monotonic penalty for scientists displaying political affiliations: the stronger their posts, the less credible their profile and research are perceived, and the lower the public's willingness to read their content, especially among oppositely aligned respondents. A survey of 128 scientists shows awareness of this penalty and a consensus on avoiding political expression outside their expertise. |
| Keywords: | Social Media, Scientists’ Credibility, Polarization, Online Experiment JEL Classification: A11, C93, D72, D83, D91, I23, Z10, Z13 |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cge:wacage:735 |
| By: | Prize Committee, Nobel (Nobel Prize Committee) |
| Abstract: | To Daron Acemoglu, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Simon Johnson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and James A. Robinson, University of Chicago, for studies of how institutions are formed and affect prosperity |
| Keywords: | Prosperity; Institutions |
| JEL: | O11 O43 |
| Date: | 2024–10–14 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ris:nobelp:2024_002 |