↓ Skip to main content

Stag Parties Linger: Continued Gender Bias in a Female-Rich Scientific Discipline

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
11 blogs
twitter
146 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Stag Parties Linger: Continued Gender Bias in a Female-Rich Scientific Discipline
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0049682
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lynne A. Isbell, Truman P. Young, Alexander H. Harcourt

Abstract

Discussions about the underrepresentation of women in science are challenged by uncertainty over the relative effects of the lack of assertiveness by women and the lack of recognition of them by male colleagues because the two are often indistinguishable. They can be distinguished at professional meetings, however, by comparing symposia, which are largely by invitation, and posters and other talks, which are largely participant-initiated. Analysis of 21 annual meetings of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists reveals that within the subfield of primatology, women give more posters than talks, whereas men give more talks than posters. But most strikingly, among symposia the proportion of female participants differs dramatically by the gender of the organizer. Male-organized symposia have half the number of female first authors (29%) that symposia organized by women (64%) or by both men and women (58%) have, and half that of female participation in talks and posters (65%). We found a similar gender bias from men in symposia from the past 12 annual meetings of the American Society of Primatologists. The bias is surprising given that women are the numerical majority in primatology and have achieved substantial peer recognition in this discipline.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 146 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 131 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 24%
Researcher 26 18%
Student > Master 17 12%
Professor 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 31 22%
Unknown 12 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 51 36%
Social Sciences 25 17%
Environmental Science 8 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 26 18%
Unknown 20 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 188. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2021.
All research outputs
#218,351
of 25,867,969 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#3,203
of 225,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,289
of 287,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#43
of 4,696 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,867,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,805 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,696 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.