Description of the sample.

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度层面存在性别差距，且学界已提出多种针对该差距成因的解释。本研究选取四类人员性别占比各异的学术领域作为研究对象，旨在解答如下问题：其一，某学术领域的性别构成与其内男女科研人员的科研产出及学术认可度之间存在何种关联？其二，不同学术领域内男女科研人员的发文模式与其科研产出及学术认可度之间存在何种关联？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度的性别倾向均偏向男性；而在某一女性主导的子领域（护理学（Nursing））中，女性科研人员的产出更高且被引频次更多，但在另一女性主导的子领域（心理学（Psychology））中并未出现这一现象。作为女性主导的研究领域，护理学为学界关于学术性别不平等的主流研究结论提供了颇具价值的反例。本研究结果凸显了细分学术领域的必要性，同时呼吁学界将更多在性别差距分析中尚未得到充分研究的学科置于研究前沿，以期阐明现有文献中存在的相互矛盾的研究结论。