Gender gaps in scientific research: a systematic review

Introduction

Scientific research has long been the cornerstone of knowledge advancement and innovation in our society, contributing to improving the quality of life for the population and training professionals geared towards research (Delgado, 2021).

According to Houssay (1960), the importance of scientific research lies in the fact that health, well-being, wealth, power, and independence of nations depend on it. Scientific research allows us to better understand biological processes and diseases, leading to advances in medicine and more effective treatments. Additionally, scientific research drives technological development and innovation, which in turn generates economic wealth and power for nations that invest in it.

Gender equity in scientific research is a topic of growing concern and debate worldwide. Despite significant progress in promoting gender equality in various spheres, notable gaps persist in the participation and recognition of women in scientific research.

According to the European University Association (EUA), in universities across 48 European countries, only 15% of rectors were women, while the remaining 85% were men (EUA, 2020). Furthermore, it was highlighted that in 20 European countries, there were no women in the position of rector. Additionally, according to a report by the International Institute for Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean (IESALC) belonging to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), in 2020, only 18% of public universities in Latin America had women serving as rectors. This same report indicates that only 30% of university researchers worldwide were women, pointing to a significant gender gap in the field of research (IESALC, 2020, 2021).

Despite the increase in the number of women entering universities, many choose to leave at higher levels, which are often necessary for a career in research (IESALC, 2020). This, in turn, leads to a continuing gap in terms of production and authorship of scientific publications. A report by Elsevier (2020) indicates that despite an overall increase in the representation of women in research, persistent inequality still exists. On average, female researchers have fewer publications (38%) than their male counterparts in all countries (68%).

Gender disparities in various aspects are profound, and the numbers alone are not sufficient to reflect the extent of the challenges women face in educational and professional settings. These women continue to report being in contexts that privilege the male gender, facing barriers such as gender-based wage disparities, as well as the threat and reality of harassment and sexual violence on campuses (UNESCO, 2021). There is also faster promotion of male gender, stricter review processes for women's research manuscripts, and the time constraints faced by female assistant professors with children, making their records less competitive (Chen and Crown, 2019).

As can be observed, numerous studies have revealed concerning patterns of inequality, from the underrepresentation of women in academic and scientific leadership positions to the disparity in funding and recognition opportunities. The gender gap in scientific research has profound implications. By excluding women from scientific decision-making, valuable perspectives and viewpoints are lost, and the diversity of ideas necessary for innovation is limited, resulting in a loss of talent and scientific potential.

Considering the commitment to gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, which is part of Sustainable Development Goal 5 (SDG), and the elimination of gender disparities in education mentioned in SDG 4 (United Nations, 2020), this research proposes a systematic review to analyze the evidence regarding gender gaps in scientific research. By identifying key factors contributing to this inequality, it seeks to contribute and provide a foundation for future research and actions aimed at closing the gender gaps in scientific research.

Methods

For the development of this research, a search for scientific production associated with the topic of gender gaps in scientific production was conducted through a systematic review of previous studies. This method aims to identify, interpret, and evaluate different works carried out by scholars on a specific topic or field, based on the text (Pardal and Ochoa, 2017), with the intention of “providing the researcher and reader with clarifying information on a specific subject” (Pardal and Pardal, 2020, p.1). Based on this, the research question for the review was formulated as follows: What are the main gender gaps in productivity and scientific research addressed in research articles?

In this study, an exhaustive systematic review of scientific literature related to gender gaps in scientific research has been conducted. To carry out this review, the guidelines established in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA, 2020) statement were followed. These guidelines are specifically designed to ensure the rigorous conduct of systematic reviews.

Results

A total of 23 articles were analyzed, all of which met the inclusion criteria (Table 1). It should be noted that all studies discussing gender gaps in scientific production among women were included. All works addressing the topic were considered, regardless of the methodology used, population, or instrument.

Figure 1. Flowchart of manuscript inclusion and exclusion according to the PRISMA 2020 method.

The research and manuscript search (Table 1) revealed several gender gaps in science and academia that affect women's participation and advancement (Table 2). One of the main gaps found is the underrepresentation of women in high-level positions in scientific research, resulting in a lack of representation in scientific publications. This situation reflects the existence of invisible barriers and entrenched social norms that limit the progress of women in academia and science (Segovia et al., 2020; Cabrera and Saraiva, 2021; Boté et al., 2022).

Furthermore, discrimination is observed in the National System of Researchers, where women have lower representation in higher levels and face difficulties in being accepted into the system. These findings suggest the presence of discrimination in the evaluation process (Cabrera and Saraiva, 2021; Carbonell et al., 2023).

Regarding academic trajectories, differences between men and women are evident in terms of graduation time, training, and specialization development. Women face obstacles and ‘losses’ in their academic trajectory that men do not experience in the same way, contributing to inequality of opportunities (Aliaño et al., 2020; González and Mayo, 2021).

Inequality in recognition and rewards is also a significant gap. Although women may achieve individual merits earlier in their careers, men tend to be more rewarded and in less time for merits that rely on collective recognition. This inequality is attributed to institutional discrimination and entrenched cultural values (Carrillo and Flores, 2023; Frigi and Ávila, 2021; Vargas et al., 2016).

Another identified gap is professional and task pigeonholing. There is occupational gender segregation in certain fields, where the nursing field is heavily feminized, and the mathematics field is masculinized. This segregation contributes to limiting options and opportunities for women in choosing their careers (Osorio and Sokil, 2022).

In the field of scientific publication, there are barriers that affect women's participation. Women need to associate more with other women to publish, while men require less collaboration (Osorio and Sokil, 2022; Centeno et al., 2020). This reflects inequalities in co-authorship networks and opportunities to participate in publications (Lis and Bahos, 2016; Beigel and Gallardo, 2021).

The tensions and challenges associated with discrimination, lack of female academic and professional role models, integration into a male-dominated culture, and lack of interest and intrinsic motivation also contribute to gender gaps. These factors can lead to the exclusion of women in the information economy and hinder their access to scientific and technological fields (Palencia and Jiménez, 2016).

Furthermore, domestic workload is identified as a factor that limits women's participation in academia and science. The traditional assignment of roles and responsibilities in society hinders women's access to positions of power, prestige, and responsibility.

In terms of academic opportunities, although women outnumber men in the demand for university education, there are still gaps in access to master's and doctoral degrees. This limits women's participation in higher levels of education and research (Carrasco, 2022; González and Mayo, 2021).

Women also face inequalities in their participation as first authors, corresponding authors, and conference speakers in the scientific field. This is reflected in less frequent citations, lower presence in specialized journals, and limited representation in scientific conferences (Tornero et al., 2020; López et al., 2021).

Furthermore, the unequal presence of men in the evaluation and review systems of scientific journals is highlighted, which can influence gender gaps in scientific publication (Aquino et al., 2022). Women have limited representation in leadership roles and in higher-level decision-making instances in institutes, laboratories, and research teams (Betlloch, 2019; Giner et al., 2021).

To address these gender gaps, the importance of implementing policies to support the integration of women in higher education is emphasized. These policies should include the collection of gender-disaggregated data, collaboration between men and women, and strengthening the integration of women in academia and science (Carrillo and Flores, 2023; Cruz, 2021; Maldona et al., 2015).

It is critical to address the risk of failure due to insufficient results in each thesis and evaluation due to the nature of gender gaps. Given that gender disparities are frequently associated with underrepresentation and a lack of visibility for women in research, it is possible that some pertinent results were not recorded or published, which might cloud the overall picture of the situation. This selective data omission may obscure even further the full dimensions of gender gaps, leading to inexact or incomplete conclusions. As a result, it is critical to consider this potential source of data while analyzing and synthesizing available data.

Given the complexity of gender gaps and their impact on various aspects of scientific research, it is essential to be able to understand that the quality of the available evidence on the various gender gaps within research was clearly and systematically assessed.

Discussion

The research reveals various gender gaps in the scientific and academic field that hinder the participation and advancement of women. Multiple areas have been identified where these gaps are evident, calling for urgent attention to achieve gender equality and promote greater female representation in science and academia.

The underrepresentation of women in high-level positions in scientific research and the lack of representation in scientific publications reflect invisible barriers and entrenched social norms that limit their progress in academia and science (Segovia et al., 2020; Cabrera and Saraiva, 2021; Boté et al., 2022). This highlights the need to address these barriers and promote greater female participation and representation.

Discrimination in the National System of Researchers, where women face difficulties in being accepted into the system and have lower representation at higher levels, suggests the presence of discrimination in the evaluation process (Cabrera and Saraiva, 2021; Carbonell et al., 2023). It is essential to work towards eliminating biases and promoting fair and unbiased evaluation at all levels.

Differences in academic trajectories between men and women, including time to graduation, training, and specialization development, contribute to the inequality of opportunities (Aliaño et al., 2020; González and Mayo, 2021). These differences indicate the need to implement measures that support and promote equal opportunities for all individuals, regardless of gender.

Inequality in recognition and rewards is another significant gap, where it is observed that although women may achieve individual merits earlier in their careers, men tend to be rewarded to a greater extent and in less time for merits that depend on collective recognition (Carrillo and Flores, 2023; Frigi and Ávila, 2021; Vargas et al., 2016). This inequality reflects the existence of institutional discrimination and entrenched cultural values, emphasizing the need to promote equitable evaluation and recognition.

Professional and occupational segregation, where certain fields are feminized or masculinized, such as nursing and mathematics respectively, limit women's choices and opportunities in career selection (Osorio and Sokil, 2022). It is essential to promote greater diversity and eliminate gender stereotypes in all professional fields.

Regarding barriers in scientific publishing, it is observed that women need to collaborate more with other women to publish, while men require less collaboration (Osorio and Sokil, 2022; Centeno et al., 2020). This reflects inequalities in co-authorship networks and opportunities to participate in publications, emphasizing the importance of fostering collaboration and support among women in the scientific field.

The tensions and challenges associated with discrimination, the lack of female academic and professional role models, integration into a male-dominated culture, and a lack of intrinsic interest and motivation contribute to gender gaps (Palencia and Jiménez, 2016). These factors need to be addressed through programs and policies that promote gender equality and encourage women's interest and participation in science.

The unequal presence of men in the evaluation and peer review systems of scientific journals, as well as in leadership roles in institutes, laboratories, and research teams, highlights the need to promote greater female representation in these areas (Betlloch, 2019; Giner et al., 2021). This involves implementing measures that foster gender equity and active participation of women in decision-making processes.

Limited national incentive policies also need to be addressed. It is essential to develop policies that promote gender equality in the field of science and academia, including the collection of gender-disaggregated data, collaboration between men and women, and strengthening the integration of women in higher education (Carrillo and Flores, 2023; Cruz, 2021; Maldona et al., 2015). These policies are crucial to address gender gaps and promote greater participation and representation of women in science and academia.

For future research on this topic, it is essential not only to investigate why there is a difference between male and female production but also to explore the limitations that women face daily in the field of research and article production.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the findings of this research highlight the existence of various gender gaps in the scientific and academic fields. These gaps, including underrepresentation in high-ranking positions and research, barriers in scientific publishing, limited national incentive policies, unequal academic opportunities, lower likelihood of being primary or corresponding authors and limited participation as conference speakers, presence of men in evaluation and peer review systems of scientific journals, professional and occupational segregation, and discrimination, require urgent attention. It is essential to implement policies and measures that promote gender equality, eliminate biases and barriers, and foster greater participation and representation of women in science and academia.