Gender Differences in Research Topic and Method Convergence among Collaborating Scholars in Library and Information Science

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.21908v1
• Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2026 07:06:18 GMT
• Title: Gender Differences in Research Topic and Method Convergence among Collaborating Scholars in Library and Information Science
• Abstract summary: This study uses a relatively systematic methodology to address the difficulty of studying gender differences in academic publishing.<n>It provides insights into the convergence and diversity of research topics and methods chosen by scholars.
• Score: 3.5111161561666084
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This study explores gender differences in research topic choice and methodology among collaborating scholars. Previous studies have often focused on gender differences in research topics or methods at the individual level of scholars, without considering collaborating groups, lacking depth and practical guidance. This study takes Library and Information Science (LIS) as an example, employing the Top2Vec method for topic identification and the CogFT model for research method classification. It systematically analyzes 25,204 papers published between 1990 and 2022 to investigate gender differences in the convergence of research topics and method choices among collaborating scholars in this field. The results of the study found that female scholars showed lower convergence in their research methods and topic choices compared to male scholars. This study uses a relatively systematic methodology to address the difficulty of studying gender differences in academic publishing, and is expected to serve as a reference for other disciplines and research questions. This study also emphasizes the manifestation of gender differences in collaborative research and provides insights into the convergence and diversity of research topics and methods chosen by scholars.

Related papers

• Personalized Auto-Research: Towards a True AI Co-Scientist [90.01790420664169]
  Given a research goal, state-of-the-art systems remain researcher-agnostic.<n>What counts as novel, valuable, or feasible depends on the researcher.<n>We propose a framework that threads a graph-grounded researcher context through retrieval, hypothesis search, experimentation, writing, and review.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-14T20:43:27Z)
• Gender Differences in Research Topic and Method Selection in Library and Information Science: Perspectives from Three Top Journals [8.370467804153506]
  The study offers insights into the specific research design processes that contribute to gender differences in method selection.<n>The findings showed that women tend to use Interview while men prefer Theoretical approach, across a range of topics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-02T07:48:33Z)
• Research Method Usage across Academic Ages in Library and Information Science: An Empirical Study (1990-2023) [7.4287545941586615]
  Academic age shapes career development, influencing research behavior, output volume, and methodological choices.<n>A corpus of 26,677 articles published 1990-2023 in 14 authoritative Library and Information Science journals was compiled.<n>Mid-career scholars exhibit the highest method diversity; late-career scholars the lowest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-20T03:57:28Z)
• Best Practices For Empirical Meta-Algorithmic Research: Guidelines from the COSEAL Research Network [46.56867772369597]
  Best practices for meta-algorithmic research exist, but they are scattered between different publications and fields.<n>This report collects good practices for empirical meta-algorithmic research across the subfields of the COSEAL community.<n>It establishes the current state-of-the-art practices within meta-algorithmic research and serves as a guideline to both new researchers and practitioners in meta-algorithmic fields.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-18T12:59:45Z)
• Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation [58.064940977804596]
  A plethora of new AI models and tools has been proposed, promising to empower researchers and academics worldwide to conduct their research more effectively and efficiently.<n>Ethical concerns regarding shortcomings of these tools and potential for misuse take a particularly prominent place in our discussion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:26:45Z)
• Gender assignment in doctoral theses: revisiting Teseo with a method based on cultural consensus theory [0.0]
  This study critically evaluates gender assignment methods within academic contexts.<n>The research introduces nomquamgender, a cultural consensus-based method, and applies it to Teseo, a Spanish dissertation database.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-20T15:22:01Z)
• 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)
• Delineating Feminist Studies through bibliometric analysis [1.1060425537315088]
  This paper proposes a novel approach for identifying gender/sex related publications scattered across diverse scientific disciplines.<n>We employ bibliometric techniques, natural language processing (NLP) and manual curation to compile a dataset of scientific publications.<n>The resulting dataset comprises over 1.9 million scientific documents published between 1668 and 2023, spanning four languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-27T12:52:51Z)
• The Quest for the Right Mediator: Surveying Mechanistic Interpretability Through the Lens of Causal Mediation Analysis [51.046457649151336]
  We propose a perspective on interpretability research grounded in causal mediation analysis.<n>We describe the history and current state of interpretability taxonomized according to the types of causal units (mediators) employed.<n>We discuss the pros and cons of each mediator, providing insights as to when particular kinds of mediators and search methods are most appropriate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T17:51:42Z)
• Thanking the World: Exploring Gender-Based Differences in Acknowledgment Patterns and Support Systems in Theses [0.0]
  This paper investigates the sources of support for male and female researchers in completing their master's or doctoral theses. We utilize a novel method of extracting the various types of support systems that are acknowledged in 1252 ETDs using RoBERTa-based models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-10T04:06:55Z)
• A Diachronic Analysis of Paradigm Shifts in NLP Research: When, How, and Why? [84.46288849132634]
  We propose a systematic framework for analyzing the evolution of research topics in a scientific field using causal discovery and inference techniques. We define three variables to encompass diverse facets of the evolution of research topics within NLP. We utilize a causal discovery algorithm to unveil the causal connections among these variables using observational data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T11:08:00Z)
• Award rate inequities in biomedical research [55.850540873687386]
  The authors performed an analysis of 14,263 biomedical research proposals with proposed start dates between 2010-2022 from the University of Michigan Medical School. There is a clear relationship between race/ethnicity and rates of proposal award. Black/African American and Asian researchers appear disadvantaged across all submission categories relative to White researchers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-14T14:05:39Z)

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.