English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Efforts to combat continuing gender inequalities in academia need to beinformed by evidence about where differences occur. Citations are relevant aspotential evidence in appointment and promotion decisions, but it is unclearwhether there have been historical gender differences in average citationimpact that might explain the current shortfall of senior female academics.This study investigates the evolution of gender differences in citation impact1996-2018 for six million articles from seven large English-speaking nations:Australia, Canada, Ireland, Jamaica, New Zealand, UK, and the USA. The resultsshow that a small female citation advantage has been the norm over time for allthese countries except the USA, where there has been no practical difference.The female citation advantage is largest, and statistically significant in mostyears, for Australia and the UK. This suggests that any academic bias againstciting female authored research cannot explain current employment inequalities.Nevertheless, comparisons using recent citation data, or avoiding italtogether, during appointments or promotion may disadvantage females in somecountries by underestimating the likely impact of their work, especially in thelong term.

Female citation impact superiority 1996-2018 in six out of seven English-speaking nations