Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gender comparisons of social work faculty using H-Index scores

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study is to determine the role of gender and faculty rank in explaining variance in individual research impact and productivity for social work doctoral faculty. Research impact and productivity were assessed with the H-Index, which is a widely used citation index measure that assesses the quality and quantity of published research articles. We compared the individual H-Index scores for all doctoral level social work faculty from doctoral programs in the United States (N = 1699). Differences in H-Index means were assessed between genders at each tenure-track faculty rank, and between faculty ranks for each gender. Both gender and faculty rank were associated with differences in scholarly impact and productivity. Although men had higher H-Index scores than women in all faculty ranks, the gender gap was the greatest between men and women at the Full Professor level. The gender gap was least pronounced at the Associate Professor level, where women’s H-Index scores were closer to those of men. Results support previous studies in which women in the social sciences have lower H-Index scores than men. The diminished gap between men and women at the Associate Professor level may suggest that women get promoted to Full Professor less frequently than men at comparable career milestones. While the results of this study are consistent with the argument that women face unique barriers to academic promotion and other forms of academic success in social work, these results do not explain any specific barriers that may cause the gender gap.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  • Anyikwa, V. A., Chiarelli-Helminiak, C. M., Hodge, D. M., & Wells-Wilbon, R. (2015). Women empowering women. Journal of Social Work Education, 51, 723–737.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baneyx, A. (2008). “Publish or Perish” as citation metrics used to analyze scientific output in the humanities: International case studies in economics, geography, social sciences, philosophy, and history. Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis, 56, 363–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barner, J. R., Holosko, M. J., Thyer, B. A., & King, S. (2015). Research productivity in top-ranked schools in psychology and social work: Does having a research culture matter? Journal of Social Work Education, 51, 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bent-Goodley, T. B., & Sarnoff, S. K. (2008). The role and status of women in social work education: Past and future considerations. Journal of Social Work Education, 44, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69, 131–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eloy, J. A., Svider, P., Chandrasekhar, S. S., Husain, Q., Mauro, K. M., Setzen, M., et al. (2012). Gender disparities in scholarly productivity within academic otolaryngology departments. Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, 148, 215–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geraci, L., Balsis, S., & Busch, A. J. B. (2015). Gender and the h index in psychology. Scientometrics, 105, 2023–2034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerten, A. M. (2011). Moving beyond family-friendly policies for faculty mothers. Affilia, 26, 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W. (2016). Publish or Perish (Version: 4.25.1) [Software]. Retrieved from http://www.harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish.

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 16569–16572.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, D. R., & Lacasse, J. R. (2011). Evaluating Journal Quality: Is the H-Index a better measure than impact factors? Research on Social Work Practice, 21, 222–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holley, L. C., & Young, D. S. (2013). Career decisions and experiences of social work faculty: A Gender comparison. Journal of Social Work Education, 41, 297–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holosko, M. J., Barner, J. R., & Allen, J. L. (2015). Citation impact of women in social work: Exploring gender and research culture. Research on Social Work Practice. (Advance online publication).

  • Hopkins, A. L., Jawitz, J. W., McCarty, C., Goldman, A., & Basu, N. B. (2013). Disparities in publication patterns by gender, race, and ethnicity based on a survey of random sample authors. Scientometrics, 96, 515–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, L. A., & Leahey, E. (2010). Parenting and research productivity: New evidence and methods. Social Studies of Science, 40, 433–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutson, S. R. (2006). Self-citation in archaeology: Age, gender, prestige, and the self. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 13, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacso, P. (2008). The pros and cons of computing the h-index using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32, 437–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacasse, J. R., Hodge, D. R., & Bean, K. F. (2011). Evaluating the productivity of social work scholars using the H-Index. Research on Social Work Practice, 21, 599–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linton, J. D., Tierney, R., & Walsh, S. T. (2011). Publish or Perish: How are research and reputation related? Serials Review, 37, 244–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPhail, B. A. (2004). Setting the record straight: Social work is not a female-dominated profession. Social Work, 49, 323–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakamoto, I., Anastas, J. W., McPhail, B. A., & Colarossi, L. G. (2008). Status of women in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 44, 37–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellers, S. L., Mathiesen, S. G., Perry, R., & Smith, T. (2004). Evaluation of social work journal quality: Citation versus reputation approaches. Journal of Social Work Education, 40(1), 143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellers, S. L., Mathiesen, S. G., Smith, T., & Perry, R. (2006). Perceptions of professional social work journals: Findings from a national survey. Journal of Social Work Education, 42, 139–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2007). Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72, 253–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truex, D., Cuellar, M., & Takeda, H. (2009). Assessing scholarly influence: Using the Hirsch indices to reframe the discourse. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10, 560–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zerden, L., Ilinitch, T. L., Carlston, R., Knutson, D., Blesdoe, B. E., & Howard, M. O. (2015). Social work faculty development: An exploratory study of non-tenure-track women faculty. Journal of Social Work Education, 51, 738–753.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Social Work, Florida State University, 296 Champions Way, Tallahassee, FL, 32306, USA

    T. Edison Carter, Thomas E. Smith & Philip J. Osteen

Authors
  1. T. Edison Carter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas E. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philip J. Osteen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Edison Carter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carter, T., Smith, T.E. & Osteen, P.J. Gender comparisons of social work faculty using H-Index scores. Scientometrics 111, 1547–1557 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2287-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2287-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation