Gender assignment in doctoral theses: revisiting Teseo with a method based on cultural consensus theory
arXiv:2501.18607 · doi:10.1007/s11192-024-05079-z
Abstract
This study critically evaluates gender assignment methods within academic contexts, employing a comparative analysis of diverse techniques, including a SVM classifier, gender-guesser, genderize.io, and a Cultural Consensus Theory based classifier. Emphasizing the significance of transparency, data sources, and methodological considerations, the research introduces nomquamgender, a cultural consensus-based method, and applies it to Teseo, a Spanish dissertation database. The results reveal a substantial reduction in the number of individuals with unknown gender compared to traditional methods relying on INE data. The nuanced differences in gender distribution underscore the importance of methodological choices in gender studies, urging for transparent, comprehensive, and freely accessible methods to enhance the accuracy and reliability of gender assignment in academic research. After reevaluating the problem of gender imbalances in the doctoral system we can conclude that it's still evident although the trend is clearly set for its reduction. Finaly, specific problems related to some disciplines, including STEM fields and seniority roles are found to be worth of attention in the near future.
References in corpus (6)
- Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines
- The role of gender in scholarly authorship
- Inferring Gender from Names on the Web: A Comparative Evaluation of Gender Detection Methods
- A gender analysis of top scientists' collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy
- Gender differences in scientific careers: A large-scale bibliometric analysis
- On the lack of women researchers in the Middle East & North Africa