Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Gender-specific analysis of the authors and the editorial board of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology from 2000 to 2020
View through CrossRef
AbstractMotivated by the worldwide debate on gender equality, we analyzed the gender structure of the authors and the editorial board of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology. We wrote an algorithm to assign authors’ first names to a gender to determine the gender distribution of publications. We evaluated publications from German research institutes from 2000 to 2020. This resulted in a data set of 2929 authors. We could assign a first name to almost all authors. The percentage of female authors increased until 2008, but thereafter stagnated at around 30%. The position of senior author is far less often held by women (around 15%). Even though multiple political measures were implemented to increase the female participation, our analysis has shown no increase regardless. We also observed a strong decrease in German authorship (both male and female) since 2000. In the editorial board and for advisory editors, there has been a substantial increase in the proportion of women since 2016 as the result of appointments by the editor-in-chief. We discuss the strengths and limitations of our study in context with the literature and current developments in society and science and methodological pitfalls of studies in this field. More research is required to obtain a full picture of gender structure in science and to be able to properly interpret the data.
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Title: Gender-specific analysis of the authors and the editorial board of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology from 2000 to 2020
Description:
AbstractMotivated by the worldwide debate on gender equality, we analyzed the gender structure of the authors and the editorial board of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology.
We wrote an algorithm to assign authors’ first names to a gender to determine the gender distribution of publications.
We evaluated publications from German research institutes from 2000 to 2020.
This resulted in a data set of 2929 authors.
We could assign a first name to almost all authors.
The percentage of female authors increased until 2008, but thereafter stagnated at around 30%.
The position of senior author is far less often held by women (around 15%).
Even though multiple political measures were implemented to increase the female participation, our analysis has shown no increase regardless.
We also observed a strong decrease in German authorship (both male and female) since 2000.
In the editorial board and for advisory editors, there has been a substantial increase in the proportion of women since 2016 as the result of appointments by the editor-in-chief.
We discuss the strengths and limitations of our study in context with the literature and current developments in society and science and methodological pitfalls of studies in this field.
More research is required to obtain a full picture of gender structure in science and to be able to properly interpret the data.
Related Results
Bibliometric development of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
Bibliometric development of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
AbstractMotivated by the 150-year anniversary of the Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology in 2023, we studied the bibliometric development of the journal. We evaluated da...
The Cold War in pharmacology: a bibliometric analysis of Berlin’s contributions to Naunyn‑Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (1947–1974)
The Cold War in pharmacology: a bibliometric analysis of Berlin’s contributions to Naunyn‑Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (1947–1974)
AbstractAfter World War II, Berlin was divided into the West, controlled by The United States, the UK, and France, and the East, controlled by the Soviet Union, resulting in a Cold...
Bibliometric analysis of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (1947–1974)
Bibliometric analysis of Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (1947–1974)
AbstractNaunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology is the oldest pharmacological journal, founded in 1873. This bibliometric analysis examines the pivotal transformations withi...
A bibliometric study of the most-cited research articles and reviews in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (1969–2024)
A bibliometric study of the most-cited research articles and reviews in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (1969–2024)
Abstract
The objective of this study was to perform a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most-cited research articles and the top 100 most-cited r...
How Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology deals with fraudulent papers from paper mills
How Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology deals with fraudulent papers from paper mills
AbstractFraudulent papers from paper mills are a serious threat to the entire scientific community. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology has become the target of a massiv...
Country-specific citation disparities in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology from 2001 to 2024
Country-specific citation disparities in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology from 2001 to 2024
Abstract
This bibliometric study examined disparities in research output and citation impact in 4155 (including all types of documents) resea...
An extra pair of eyes: adopting innovative approaches to detect integrity issues in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
An extra pair of eyes: adopting innovative approaches to detect integrity issues in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
Abstract
Scientific integrity has been increasingly challenged by scientific misconduct and paper mills, resulting in an increase in retractions. Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Ar...
Metadata analysis of retracted fake papers in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
Metadata analysis of retracted fake papers in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
AbstractAn increasing fake paper problem is a cause for concern in the scientific community. These papers look scientific but contain manipulated data or are completely fictitious....

