MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1889290940

Does Economics Have a Gender

2009· article· en· W1889290940 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christina Jonung, Ann‐Charlotte Ståhlberg

Bibliographic record

VenueEcon journal watch · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Point (geometry)Positive economicsGender balanceDocumentationSociologySchools of economic thoughtEconomicsPolitical scienceSocial scienceGender studiesNeoclassical economicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are pleased that our paper on gender balance in the economics profession incited a number of commentaries on "Why few women in economics?" ( all in May 2008 Econ Journal Watch). The commentators include one sociologist, one psychologist, and three non-traditional economists-making for great breadth. Here we address the issues that seem most important to us. Our paper provided original documentation of the low representation of women in academic economics in Sweden, and drew on other studies for Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and the United States. Across the five countries, the trends are remarkably similar. From being totally absent or having a very low presence among doctoral students in economics in the 1970s, women have since made significant gains. Today they account for about one third of the PhDs granted in the five countries. Nevertheless, that figure is lower than the percentage of women among the doctoral degrees as a whole, today approaching one half, and even more so compared to the share of women PhDs within the other social sciences. This brings out the question: Why is the representation of women in economics low relative to other fields? An answer must account for a second matter; namely, why we have seen a strong inflow of women to economics during recent decades-especially pronounced in Sweden during the 1990s and 2000s. We find that our commentators are more eager to point out explanations of why women would not be attracted to economics than to analyze the forces which have in fact enhanced women's interest in economics in recent years. Another issue is women's lack of progress in academic faculty rank, especially to full professor in economics. Despite women's inroads in economics, many countries still count only a handful of women full professors, their proportion in the five countries we studied ranging between 5 and 9 percent. Figures presented at the 2008 meeting of the American Economic Association (CSWEP 2008) show a rising female proportion of newly completed PhDs ( 35 percent), but lagging female shares of assistant and associate professors, and women full professors hovering around 8 percent.(3) Yet another question is whether it matters whether more women learn economics and gain position of influence in academic economics. Will it bring about any changes in economics or in society at large?

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcon journal watchSame topicExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesFrench-language works237,207