Variables and their definitions.

Gender disparities in science have become a salient concern for policy makers and researchers. Previous studies have documented a gender gap in research productivity and recognition in the sciences, and different reasons for this gap have been proposed. In this study, we examine four academic fields with different proportions of men and women in their population. We address the following questions: What is the relationship between the gendered make-up of a field and the productivity and recognition of men and women scientists in that academic field? What is the relationship between the publication patterns of men and women in different academic fields and their productivity and recognition? We find that gendered patterns of productivity and recognition favour men in man-dominated subfields (Mathematical Physics and Software Engineering), while women were more productive and highly cited in one woman-dominated subfield (Nursing), though not in another (Psychology). Nursing, a woman-gendered field, provides an interesting counterpoint to the most usual findings regarding gender disparities in academia. Our findings highlight the need to disaggregate academic fields and to bring to the forefront other disciplines that remain under investigated in analyses of gender gaps to potentially elucidate conflicting findings in the literature.

科学界的性别不平等问题已成为政策制定者与科研人员共同关注的突出议题。既往研究已证实科学界在科研产出与学术认可层面存在性别差距，并针对该差距提出了多种成因解释。本研究选取了男女占比各异的四个学术领域展开分析，旨在解答以下问题：其一，某一学术领域的性别构成与该领域内男女科研人员的科研产出及学术认可之间存在何种关联？其二，不同学术领域中男女科研人员的发文模式与其科研产出及学术认可之间存在何种关联？研究结果显示，在男性主导的子领域（数学物理（Mathematical Physics）与软件工程（Software Engineering））中，科研产出与学术认可的性别倾向偏向男性；而在女性主导的子领域中，仅护理学（Nursing）领域的女性科研人员展现出更高的科研产出与更高的被引频次，心理学（Psychology）领域则未呈现这一特征。作为女性主导的领域，护理学为学术界性别差距的既有研究结论提供了颇具价值的反例参照。本研究结果表明，我们有必要对学术领域进行细分，并关注那些在性别差距分析中尚未得到充分研究的其他学科，以进一步阐明相关文献中存在的矛盾结论。