↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Stag Parties Linger: Continued Gender Bias in a Female-Rich Scientific Discipline

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
11 blogs
twitter
147 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Stag Parties Linger: Continued Gender Bias in a Female-Rich Scientific Discipline
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0049682
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lynne A. Isbell, Truman P. Young, Alexander H. Harcourt

Abstract

Discussions about the underrepresentation of women in science are challenged by uncertainty over the relative effects of the lack of assertiveness by women and the lack of recognition of them by male colleagues because the two are often indistinguishable. They can be distinguished at professional meetings, however, by comparing symposia, which are largely by invitation, and posters and other talks, which are largely participant-initiated. Analysis of 21 annual meetings of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists reveals that within the subfield of primatology, women give more posters than talks, whereas men give more talks than posters. But most strikingly, among symposia the proportion of female participants differs dramatically by the gender of the organizer. Male-organized symposia have half the number of female first authors (29%) that symposia organized by women (64%) or by both men and women (58%) have, and half that of female participation in talks and posters (65%). We found a similar gender bias from men in symposia from the past 12 annual meetings of the American Society of Primatologists. The bias is surprising given that women are the numerical majority in primatology and have achieved substantial peer recognition in this discipline.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 147 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 133 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 24%
Researcher 26 18%
Student > Master 17 12%
Professor 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 33 23%
Unknown 12 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 51 35%
Social Sciences 25 17%
Environmental Science 8 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 28 19%
Unknown 20 14%