Supplementary Files
Keywords
ACADEMIA
HUMAN CAPITAL
PUBLICATIONS
How to Cite
Abstract
This paper uses a two stage Tobit regression analysis and the Oaxaca-Ransom decomposition to examine the existence of a gender differential in the score assigned to academic publications and professional work submitted for evaluation before the Academic Regime Commission at Universidad de Costa Rica. Results show that a significant gender differential does exists and amounts to 5,54%. Most of this differential is associated with the discrimination coefficient against women. The results also exhibit the existence of a strong penalty to co-authorships and important differences in the score received depending on faculty affiliation. Finally, it is worth asking if there is a strong random component in the evaluation. Therefore, a revision of the current evaluation process to assess academic and professional work used by the institution is suggested.
References
Babcock, L., Recalde, M. P., Vesterlund, L., & Weingart, L. (2017). Gender differences in accepting and receiving requests for tasks with low promotability. American Economic Review, 107(3), 714–747. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20141734
Bagues, M., Sylos-Labini, M., & Zinovyeva, N. (2017). Does the gender composition of scientific committees matter? American Economic Review, 107(4), 1207–1238. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151211
Barbezat, D. A. (2006). Gender differences in research patterns among PhD economists. The Journal of Economic Education, 37(3), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.37.3.359-375
Blanco, L. C. (2023a). Engañadas por la academia: una revisión del estatus de las mujeres en la academia. Revista de Ciencias Económicas, 41(1), e51726. https://doi.org/10.15517/rce.v41i1.51726
Blanco, L. C. (2023b). Diferenciales salariales de género y sus determinantes para el personal académico titular en la Universidad de Costa Rica. Revista de Ciencias Económicas, 41(2), e52311. https://doi.org/10.15517/rce.v41i2.52311
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2010). Microeconometrics using Stata, revised edition. Stata Press.
Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W.M. (2014). Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15(3), 75–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100614541236
De Paola, M., & Scoppa, V. (2015). Gender discrimination and evaluators’ gender: evidence from Italian academia. Economica, 82(325), 162–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12107
DORA. (2013). San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment. https://sfdora.org/read/
European Commission, European Education and Culture Executive Agency, & European Education and Culture Executive Agency. (2017). Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Academic Staff – 2017 (Eurydice Report). https://doi.org/10.2797/408169
Fox, C. W., Burns, C. S., & Meyer, J. A. (2016). Editor and reviewer gender influence the peer review process but not peer review outcomes at an ecology journal. Functional Ecology, 30(1), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12529
Ginther, D. K., & Kahn, S. (2004). Women in Economics: moving up or falling off the academic career ladder? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(3), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330042162386
Glover, J. (2000). Women and scientific employment (J. Campling, Ed.). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333981085
Hamermesh, D. S. (2020). Chapter 1: Measuring success in economics. En S. Galiani & U., Panizza (Eds.), Publishing and measuring success in economics (pp. 11–15). CEPR Press.
Hengel, E. (2017). Publishing while female: are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review (Cambridge Working Paper Economics, No 1753). https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.17548
Ibarra, M. E., & Castellanos Llanos, G. (2009). Género y educación superior. Un análisis de la participación de las mujeres como profesoras en la Universidad del Valle. La manzana de la discordia, 4(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.25100/lamanzanadeladiscordia.v4i1.1476
Jabbaz, M., Samper-Gras, T., & Díaz, C. (2019). La brecha salarial de género en las instituciones científicas. Estudio de caso. Convergencia Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 80, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.29101/crcs.v26i80.11248
Jann, B. (2008). The Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition for linear regression models. The Stata Journal, 8(4), 453–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0800800401
Liebowitz, S. (2020). Chapter 13: Our uneconomic methods of measuring economic research. En S. Galiani & U. Panizza (Eds.), Publishing and measuring success in economics (pp. 99–104). CEPR Press.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1999a). Special edition: a study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. The MIT faculty newsletter, XI, 4.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1999b). A study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.pdf
McElroy, M. B. (2013). The 2013 Report of the Committee on the Status of Women in the Economics Profession. American Economic Association. https://web.archive.org/web/20221209214545/https://www.aeaweb.org/content/file?id=701
Murray, D., Siler, K., Larivière, V., Chan, W. M., Collings, A. M., Raymond, J., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2019). Author-Reviewer Homophily in Peer Review. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/400515
Oaxaca, R. L., & Ransom, M. R. (1994). On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials. Journal of Econometrics, 61(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)90074-4
O’Hagan, J., & Kuld, L. (2020). Chapter 12: Multi-authored journal articles in economics: Why the spiralling upward trend? En S. Galiani & U. Panizza (Eds.), Publishing and measuring success in economics (pp. 93–98). CEPR Press.
Sarsons, H. (2017). Recognition for group work: gender differences in academia. American Economic Review, 107(5), 141–145. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171126
Toope, S. (2019). University of Cambridge: Gender pay gap report 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/20221213200932/https://www.equality.admin.cam.ac.uk/files/gender_pay_gap_report_2018_final_2.pdf
Universidad de Costa Rica. (1974). Estatuto Orgánico de la Universidad de Costa Rica. La Gaceta Oficial, 56.
Universidad de Costa Rica. (2008). Reglamento de Régimen Académico y Servicio Docente. La Gaceta Universitaria, 41.
Wooldridge, J. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. The MIT Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Laura Cristina Blanco