- -

Nanotechnology researchers' collaboration relationships: A gender analysis of access to scientific information

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Nanotechnology researchers' collaboration relationships: A gender analysis of access to scientific information

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre: nanocollabs_socst ...
Tamaño: 539.5Kb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión del Autor.
Abrir
[Cerrado]
Nombre: Social Studies of ...
Tamaño: 423.8Kb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión editorial
Solicitar una copia al autor
dc.contributor.author Villanueva-Felez, África es_ES
dc.contributor.author Woolley, Richard Derle es_ES
dc.contributor.author Cañibano Sánchez, Carolina es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2016-02-01T11:47:15Z
dc.date.available 2016-02-01T11:47:15Z
dc.date.issued 2015-02
dc.identifier.issn 0306-3127
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/60423
dc.description.abstract Women are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields, particularly at higher levels of organizations. This article investigates the impact of this underrepresentation on the processes of interpersonal collaboration in nanotechnology. Analyses are conducted to assess: (1) the comparative tie strength of women's and men's collaborations, (2) whether women and men gain equal access to scientific information through collaborators, (3) which tie characteristics are associated with access to information for women and men, and (4) whether women and men acquire equivalent amounts of information by strengthening ties. Our results show that the overall tie strength is less for women's collaborations and that women acquire less strategic information through collaborators. Women and men rely on different tie characteristics in accessing information, but are equally effective in acquiring additional information resources by strengthening ties. This article demonstrates that the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics has an impact on the interpersonal processes of scientific collaboration, to the disadvantage of women scientists. es_ES
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher SAGE Publications (UK and US) es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Social Studies of Science es_ES
dc.rights Reserva de todos los derechos es_ES
dc.subject Gender es_ES
dc.subject Homophily es_ES
dc.subject Information es_ES
dc.subject Nanotechnology, es_ES
dc.subject Scientific Collaboration es_ES
dc.subject STEM es_ES
dc.subject Tie characteristics es_ES
dc.title Nanotechnology researchers' collaboration relationships: A gender analysis of access to scientific information es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.1177/0306312714552347
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento - Institut de Gestió de la Innovació i del Coneixement es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Villanueva-Felez, Á.; Woolley, RD.; Cañibano Sánchez, C. (2015). Nanotechnology researchers' collaboration relationships: A gender analysis of access to scientific information. Social Studies of Science. 45(1):100-129. doi:10.1177/0306312714552347 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306312714552347 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 100 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 129 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 45 es_ES
dc.description.issue 1 es_ES
dc.relation.senia 283532 es_ES
dc.description.references ACKER, J. (1990). HIERARCHIES, JOBS, BODIES: Gender & Society, 4(2), 139-158. doi:10.1177/089124390004002002 es_ES
dc.description.references Aitken, C., Power, R., & Dwyer, R. (2008). A very low response rate in an on-line survey of medical practitioners. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 32(3), 288-289. doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2008.00232.x es_ES
dc.description.references Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics. doi:10.1515/9781400829828 es_ES
dc.description.references Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139-1160. doi:10.1177/0018726708094863 es_ES
dc.description.references Beaver, D. D. (2001). Scientometrics, 52(3), 365-377. doi:10.1023/a:1014254214337 es_ES
dc.description.references Boardman, P. C., & Corley, E. A. (2008). University research centers and the composition of research collaborations. Research Policy, 37(5), 900-913. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.012 es_ES
dc.description.references Bourdieu, P. (1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Science Information, 14(6), 19-47. doi:10.1177/053901847501400602 es_ES
dc.description.references Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511812507 es_ES
dc.description.references Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social Space and Symbolic Power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14. doi:10.2307/202060 es_ES
dc.description.references Bouty, I. (2000). INTERPERSONAL AND INTERACTION INFLUENCES ON INFORMAL RESOURCE EXCHANGES BETWEEN R&D RESEARCHERS ACROSS ORGANIZATIONAL BOUNDARIES. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 50-65. doi:10.2307/1556385 es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33(4), 599-616. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.008 es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers. Research Policy, 40(10), 1393-1402. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.07.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, B., & Rogers, J. D. (2002). A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy, 31(5), 769-794. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00146-9 es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, B., Dietz, J. S., & Gaughan, M. (2001). Scientific and technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(7/8), 716. doi:10.1504/ijtm.2001.002988 es_ES
dc.description.references Brass, D. J. (1985). MEN’S AND WOMEN’S NETWORKS: A STUDY OF INTERACTION PATTERNS AND INFLUENCE IN AN ORGANIZATION. Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 327-343. doi:10.2307/256204 es_ES
dc.description.references Chompalov, I., Genuth, J., & Shrum, W. (2002). The organization of scientific collaborations. Research Policy, 31(5), 749-767. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00145-7 es_ES
dc.description.references Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R. L. (2000). A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates in Web- or Internet-Based Surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(6), 821-836. doi:10.1177/00131640021970934 es_ES
dc.description.references Durbin, S. (2010). Creating Knowledge through Networks: a Gender Perspective. Gender, Work & Organization, 18(1), 90-112. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2010.00536.x es_ES
dc.description.references Ecklund, E. H., Lincoln, A. E., & Tansey, C. (2012). Gender Segregation in Elite Academic Science. Gender & Society, 26(5), 693-717. doi:10.1177/0891243212451904 es_ES
dc.description.references Ensign, P. C. (2009). Knowledge Sharing among Scientists. doi:10.1057/9780230617131 es_ES
dc.description.references Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., & Uzzi, B. (2000). Athena Unbound. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511541414 es_ES
dc.description.references Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making Social Science Matter. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511810503 es_ES
dc.description.references FOX, M. F. (2001). WOMEN, SCIENCE, AND ACADEMIA. Gender & Society, 15(5), 654-666. doi:10.1177/089124301015005002 es_ES
dc.description.references Fox, M. F. (2010). Women and Men Faculty in Academic Science and Engineering: Social-Organizational Indicators and Implications. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(7), 997-1012. doi:10.1177/0002764209356234 es_ES
dc.description.references Fox, M. F., & Stephan, P. E. (2001). Careers of Young Scientists: Social Studies of Science, 31(1), 109-122. doi:10.1177/030631201031001006 es_ES
dc.description.references Fox, M. F., Sonnert, G., & Nikiforova, I. (2009). Successful Programs for Undergraduate Women in Science and Engineering: Adapting versus Adopting the Institutional Environment. Research in Higher Education, 50(4), 333-353. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9120-4 es_ES
dc.description.references Friedkin, N. (1980). A test of structural features of granovetter’s strength of weak ties theory. Social Networks, 2(4), 411-422. doi:10.1016/0378-8733(80)90006-4 es_ES
dc.description.references Gaughan, M. (2005). Introduction to the Symposium: Women in Science. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(4), 339-342. doi:10.1007/s10961-005-2579-z es_ES
dc.description.references Gaughan, M., & Corley, E. A. (2010). Science faculty at US research universities: The impacts of university research center-affiliation and gender on industrial activities. Technovation, 30(3), 215-222. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.12.001 es_ES
dc.description.references Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. doi:10.1086/225469 es_ES
dc.description.references Hansen, M. T. (1999). The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82. doi:10.2307/2667032 es_ES
dc.description.references Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and Differential Returns: Sex Differences in Network Structure and Access in an Advertising Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 422. doi:10.2307/2393451 es_ES
dc.description.references Islam, N., & Miyazaki, K. (2009). Nanotechnology innovation system: Understanding hidden dynamics of nanoscience fusion trajectories. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(1), 128-140. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2008.03.021 es_ES
dc.description.references Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(96)00917-1 es_ES
dc.description.references Koch, N. S., & Emrey, J. A. . (2001). The Internet and Opinion Measurement: Surveying Marginalized Populations. Social Science Quarterly, 82(1), 131-138. doi:10.1111/0038-4941.00012 es_ES
dc.description.references Kyvik, S., & Teigen, M. (1996). Child Care, Research Collaboration, and Gender Differences in Scientific Productivity. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21(1), 54-71. doi:10.1177/016224399602100103 es_ES
dc.description.references Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673-702. doi:10.1177/0306312705052359 es_ES
dc.description.references Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1030.0136 es_ES
dc.description.references Lin, N. (2001). Social Capital. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815447 es_ES
dc.description.references McFadyen, M. A., & Cannella, A. A. (2004). SOCIAL CAPITAL AND KNOWLEDGE CREATION: DIMINISHING RETURNS OF THE NUMBER AND STRENGTH OF EXCHANGE RELATIONSHIPS. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 735-746. doi:10.2307/20159615 es_ES
dc.description.references McFadyen, M. A., Semadeni, M., & Cannella, A. A. (2009). Value of Strong Ties to Disconnected Others: Examining Knowledge Creation in Biomedicine. Organization Science, 20(3), 552-564. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0388 es_ES
dc.description.references Manfreda, K. L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., & Vehovar, V. (2008). Web Surveys versus other Survey Modes: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates. International Journal of Market Research, 50(1), 79-104. doi:10.1177/147078530805000107 es_ES
dc.description.references Marsden, P. V., & Campbell, K. E. (1984). Measuring Tie Strength. Social Forces, 63(2), 482. doi:10.2307/2579058 es_ES
dc.description.references Mason, M. A., & Ekman, E. M. (2007). Mothers on the Fast TrackHow a New Generation Can Balance Family and Careers. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195182675.001.0001 es_ES
dc.description.references Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335 es_ES
dc.description.references Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266. doi:10.5465/amr.1998.533225 es_ES
dc.description.references Oliver, A. L., & Liebeskind, J. P. (1997). Three Levels of Networking for Sourcing Intellectual Capital in Biotechnology. International Studies of Management & Organization, 27(4), 76-103. doi:10.1080/00208825.1997.11656719 es_ES
dc.description.references Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673. doi:10.2307/2657354 es_ES
dc.description.references Rhoton, L. A. (2011). Distancing as a Gendered Barrier. Gender & Society, 25(6), 696-716. doi:10.1177/0891243211422717 es_ES
dc.description.references Rothstein, M. G., & Davey, L. M. (1995). Gender differences in network relationships in academia. Women in Management Review, 10(6), 20-25. doi:10.1108/09649429510095999 es_ES
dc.description.references Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:3<369::aid-smj93>3.0.co;2-m es_ES
dc.description.references SCOTT, D. B. (1996). SHATTERING THE INSTRUMENTAL-EXPRESSIVE MYTH. Gender & Society, 10(3), 232-247. doi:10.1177/089124396010003003 es_ES
dc.description.references Shapin, S. (1994). A Social History of Truth. doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226148847.001.0001 es_ES
dc.description.references Shrum, W., Chompalov, I., & Genuth, J. (2001). Trust, Conflict and Performance in Scientific Collaborations. Social Studies of Science, 31(5), 681-730. doi:10.1177/030631201031005002 es_ES
dc.description.references Smith-Doerr, L. (2004). Flexibility and Fairness: Effects of the Network Form of Organization on Gender Equity in Life Science Careers. Sociological Perspectives, 47(1), 25-54. doi:10.1525/sop.2004.47.1.25 es_ES
dc.description.references Stix, G. (2001). Little Big Science. Scientific American, 285(3), 32-37. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0901-32 es_ES
dc.description.references Uzzi, B. (1996). The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674. doi:10.2307/2096399 es_ES
dc.description.references Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35. doi:10.2307/2393808 es_ES
dc.description.references Vinck, D. (2010). The Sociology of Scientific Work. doi:10.4337/9781849807197 es_ES
dc.description.references Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 132-139. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015 es_ES
dc.description.references Ziman, J. M. (Ed.). (1994). Prometheus Bound. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511585067 es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem