Gender Differences in Recognition for Group Work
Overview
Paper Summary
Women economists receive less credit for co-authored papers, contributing to a tenure gap. While solo-authored publications benefit men and women equally, each additional co-authored paper increases a man's tenure probability significantly more than a woman's, especially when co-authoring with men. This bias in credit attribution appears to be driven by beliefs about ability and not by actual differences in contribution, as demonstrated by experiments.
Explain Like I'm Five
This is like when kids work on a group project, but the girls don't get as much credit as the boys, even if they worked just as hard. Scientists saw this happen to grown-up economists, making it harder for women to get important jobs.
Possible Conflicts of Interest
None identified
Identified Limitations
Rating Explanation
This paper presents compelling observational and experimental evidence of a gender bias in credit attribution for group work in economics. The combination of real-world data and controlled experiments strengthens the argument. While the experimental settings don't perfectly mirror the academic world and the counterfactual analysis has limitations, the multiple approaches and robustness checks increase the validity of the findings. There's no obvious conflict of interest.
Good to know
This is the Starter analysis. Paperzilla Pro fact-checks every citation, researches author backgrounds and funding sources, and uses advanced AI reasoning for more thorough insights.
Explore Pro →