The Tilted Playing Field for Women in Science

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.26469v1
• Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 00:06:33 GMT
• Title: The Tilted Playing Field for Women in Science
• Abstract summary: We quantify prestige advantage as the relative likelihood that researchers at higher-ranked institutions have more collaborators.<n>We find that the association between prestige and scientific achievement differs systematically by gender.
• Score: 14.85576018801986
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Institutional prestige shapes access to resources, visibility, and collaboration opportunities in science. Yet whether prestige benefits researchers equally, and how it relates to differences in scientific productivity and collaboration, remains unclear. Here, we quantify prestige advantage as the relative likelihood that researchers at higher-ranked institutions have more collaborators and produce more high-impact papers compared to their lower-ranked peers. Analyzing nearly 5 million papers by 6.5 million authors across more than 65,000 institutions, we present a distributional, tail-sensitive framework to compare prestige advantage across groups. We find that the association between prestige and scientific achievement differs systematically by gender. While both men and women benefit from prestige, the returns are not gender-neutral: women experience comparable advantages only at the most elite institutions, whereas men retain persistent advantages across the broader hierarchy, with disparities widening at higher levels of achievement. Prestige advantage also grows nonlinearly, disproportionately benefiting authors at the most elite institutions. These differences align with collaboration patterns: women's networks are more locally clustered and focused on their own institution, while men collaborate more broadly across institutional strata. Together, these findings reveal a tilted playing field in science: one where prestige amplifies success unevenly and network structure shapes who can access its benefits.

Related papers

• Is Higher Team Gender Diversity Correlated with Better Scientific Impact? [16.17086009251377]
  We analyze the correlation between gender diversity and the scientific impact of papers using the examples of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Library and Information Science (LIS) domains.<n>We find significant gender disparities exist in both NLP and LIS domains, with underrepresentation of female scholars.<n>There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the gender diversity of paper collaborations and the number of citations received by those papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-23T03:25:42Z)
• Exploring the Role of Women in Hugging Face Organizations [46.84136061744368]
  Women are highly underrepresented in both organizations and commits distribution.<n>Addressing gender disparities is essential to create more equitable, diverse, and inclusive open-source ecosystems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T10:06:52Z)
• 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)
• GenderCARE: A Comprehensive Framework for Assessing and Reducing Gender Bias in Large Language Models [73.23743278545321]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable capabilities in natural language generation, but have also been observed to magnify societal biases.<n>GenderCARE is a comprehensive framework that encompasses innovative Criteria, bias Assessment, Reduction techniques, and Evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T15:35:46Z)
• How high-status women promote repeated collaboration among women in male-dominated contexts [8.577441679206538]
  When a woman holds the top-ranking position in a steep status hierarchy, other women on that team are more likely than men to collaborate again. In steep hierarchies, top-ranking women but not top-ranking men foster conditions in which junior women are more likely to collaborate again than junior men of similar status levels. Our research suggests that whereas status hierarchies are especially detrimental to repeated collaboration among underrepresented individuals, top-ranking women in steep status hierarchies mitigate these negative impacts between women in male-dominated settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T19:41:48Z)
• Individual and gender inequality in computer science: A career study of cohorts from 1970 to 2000 [0.817469727611392]
  We study the evolution of individual and gender inequality for cohorts from 1970 to 2000 in the whole field of computer science. The Matthew Effect is shown to accumulate advantages to early achievements and to become stronger over the decades. Women continue to fall behind because they continue to be at a higher risk of dropping out for reasons that have nothing to do with early-career achievements or social support.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T09:42:09Z)
• Flexible social inference facilitates targeted social learning when rewards are not observable [58.762004496858836]
  Groups coordinate more effectively when individuals are able to learn from others' successes. We suggest that social inference capacities may help bridge this gap, allowing individuals to update their beliefs about others' underlying knowledge and success from observable trajectories of behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-01T21:04:03Z)
• Exploring the Confounding Factors of Academic Career Success: An Empirical Study with Deep Predictive Modeling [43.91066315776696]
  We propose to explore the determinants of academic career success through an empirical and predictive modeling perspective. We analyze the co-author network and find that potential scholars work closely with influential scholars early on and more closely as they grow. We find that being a Fellow could not bring the improvements of citations and productivity growth.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-19T08:16:21Z)
• Do interests affect grant application success? The role of organizational proximity [0.11421942894219898]
  We investigate the effect of organizational proximity, defined as an applicant with the same affiliation as one of the panel members, on the probability of getting a grant. We find that the probability to get funded increases significantly for those that apply in a panel where there is a panelist from the institution where the applicant has agreed to use the grant. At the same time, the effect differs between disciplines and countries, and men profit more of it than women do.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-26T22:02:54Z)
• 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)
• Cascaded Debiasing: Studying the Cumulative Effect of Multiple Fairness-Enhancing Interventions [48.98659895355356]
  This paper investigates the cumulative effect of multiple fairness enhancing interventions at different stages of the machine learning (ML) pipeline. Applying multiple interventions results in better fairness and lower utility than individual interventions on aggregate. On the downside, fairness-enhancing interventions can negatively impact different population groups, especially the privileged group.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-08T09:20:58Z)

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.