Systemic Gendered Citation Imbalance in Computer Science: Evidence from Conferences and Journals

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.23273v1
• Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:37:34 GMT
• Title: Systemic Gendered Citation Imbalance in Computer Science: Evidence from Conferences and Journals
• Abstract summary: We investigate gender imbalance in citations of conference and journal papers in computer science.<n>We find that papers for which a woman is listed as either first or last author receive fewer citations than expected.<n>We find that the prominence of the first or last author and the structure of their local co-authorship networks are potential drivers of these imbalances.
• Score: 5.233678736391193
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Gender imbalance persists across science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, including computer science, where it appears in researcher demographics, productivity, recognition, hiring, and career progression. Given computer science's rapid expansion and global influence, addressing this imbalance is essential for broadening participation and fueling innovation. Although journal-oriented disciplines exhibit consistent gender imbalances in citation practices, it remains unclear whether similar patterns arise in the conference-centric culture of computer science. Here, we systematically investigate gender imbalance in citations of conference and journal papers in computer science. We find that papers for which a woman is listed as either first or last author receive fewer citations than expected, partly because of homophilic citation tendencies (i.e., authors tend to cite papers that share specific attributes). This imbalance is especially pronounced for conference papers--particularly those published at top-tier venues--relative to journals. Moreover, we find that the prominence of the first or last author and the structure of their local co-authorship networks are potential drivers of these imbalances. By exploring how conference-centric publishing practices can amplify systemic imbalances in computer science, our study offers insights that may inform efforts to foster more equitable representation in academia.

Related papers

• PaperMind: Benchmarking Agentic Reasoning and Critique over Scientific Papers in Multimodal LLMs [68.27437550335709]
  We introduce PaperMind, a benchmark designed to evaluate integrated and agent-oriented scientific reasoning over research papers.<n>PaperMind is constructed from real scientific papers across seven domains, including agriculture, biology, chemistry, computer science, medicine, physics, and economics.<n>By analyzing model behavior across multiple tasks, PaperMind enables a diagnostic evaluation of integrated scientific reasoning behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T05:42:39Z)
• Gender Disparities in Contributions, Leadership, and Collaboration: An Exploratory Study on Software Systems Research [1.8049331600471712]
  We analyzed 2,000 articles published over the past decade in the Journal of Systems and Software.<n>Our analysis showed that only 32.74% of the total authors are women and female-led or supervised studies were fewer than those of men.<n>Third, we explored the areas of software systems research and found that female authors are more actively involved in human-centric research domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T08:20:23Z)
• Biases in gendered citation practices: an exploratory study and some reflections on the Matthew and Matilda effects [2.0277446818410994]
  This paper aims at analyzing gendered citation practices in the software engineering literature.<n>Our results show that some efforts still need to be done to achieve fairness in citation practices in the SE field.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T19:53:41Z)
• Inclusivity in Large Language Models: Personality Traits and Gender Bias in Scientific Abstracts [49.97673761305336]
  We evaluate three large language models (LLMs) for their alignment with human narrative styles and potential gender biases. Our findings indicate that, while these models generally produce text closely resembling human authored content, variations in stylistic features suggest significant gender biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T19:26:11Z)
• Position: AI/ML Influencers Have a Place in the Academic Process [82.2069685579588]
  We investigate the role of social media influencers in enhancing the visibility of machine learning research. We have compiled a comprehensive dataset of over 8,000 papers, spanning tweets from December 2018 to October 2023. Our statistical and causal inference analysis reveals a significant increase in citations for papers endorsed by these influencers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T20:05:49Z)
• Who benefits from altmetrics? The effect of team gender composition on the link between online visibility and citation impact [0.0]
  Women's articles receive fewer academic citations than men's. Online visibility positively affects citations across research areas. Team gender composition interacts differently with visibility in these research areas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-01T09:33:31Z)
• Dynamics of Gender Bias in Computing [0.0]
  This article presents a new dataset focusing on formative years of computing as a profession (1950-1980) when U.S. government workforce statistics are thin or non-existent. It revises commonly held conjectures that gender bias in computing emerged during professionalization of computer science in the 1960s or 1970s.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T23:29:56Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Towards Understanding Gender-Seniority Compound Bias in Natural Language Generation [64.65911758042914]
  We investigate how seniority impacts the degree of gender bias exhibited in pretrained neural generation models. Our results show that GPT-2 amplifies bias by considering women as junior and men as senior more often than the ground truth in both domains. These results suggest that NLP applications built using GPT-2 may harm women in professional capacities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-19T20:05:02Z)
• A Computational Inflection for Scientific Discovery [48.176406062568674]
  We stand at the foot of a significant inflection in the trajectory of scientific discovery. As society continues on its fast-paced digital transformation, so does humankind's collective scientific knowledge. Computer science is poised to ignite a revolution in the scientific process itself.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-04T11:36:54Z)
• Assessing Gender Bias in the Information Systems Field: An Analysis of the Impact on Citations [0.0]
  This paper outlines a study to estimate the impact of scholarly citations that female IS academics accumulate vis-a-vis their male colleagues. By doing so we propose to contribute knowledge on a core dimension of gender bias in academia, which is, so far, almost completely unexplored in the IS field.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-22T18:18:52Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.