跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要报告条件入选概率的历史变化,但未说明离散选择模型或因果识别设计,现有证据不足以归入所列细分。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
David Card
Stefano DellaVigna
Patricia Funk
Nagore Iriberri

经济学家获得同行认可的性别差异

研究问题
在控制发表和引用表现后,经济学家当选学会会士的性别差异如何随时间变化,提名委员会和地域多样性又扮演什么角色?
方法与思路
作者使用四万余名经济学家的发表与引用资料,结合近三十年提名数据,比较不同时期、成就层级及多个学术荣誉的入选差异。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称女性入选差距由历史负向转为近年正向,近期优势集中于高成就者;委员会提名与地域多样性的变化也受到讨论。
阅读关注点
应核对候选人风险集、成就指标及时间分组,检查显著性与概率变化的解释,并区分提名渠道证据和委员会政策的因果效应。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要;模型、遗漏因素和因果识别设计未说明,条件入选差异不能直接证明性别或提名政策的因果影响。

原文摘要

We study the selection of Fellows of the Econometric Society, using a new data set of publications and citations for over 40,000 actively publishing economists since the early 1900s. Conditional on achievement, we document a large negative gap in the probability that women were selected as Fellows in the 1933–1979 period. This gap became positive (though not statistically significant) from 1980 to 2010, and in the past decade has become large and highly significant, with over a 100% increase in the probability of selection for female authors relative to males with similar publications and citations. The positive boost affects highly qualified female candidates (in the top 10% of authors) with no effect for the bottom 90%. Using nomination data for the past 30 years, we find a key proximate role for the Society's Nominating Committee in this shift. Since 2012, the Committee has had an explicit mandate to nominate highly qualified women, and its nominees enjoy above‐average election success (controlling for achievement). Looking beyond gender, we document similar shifts in the premium for geographic diversity: in the mid‐2000s, both the Fellows and the Nominating Committee became significantly more likely to nominate and elect candidates from outside the United States. Finally, we examine gender gaps in several other major awards for U.S. economists. We show that the gaps in the probability of selection of new fellows of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the National Academy of Sciences closely parallel those of the Econometric Society, with historically negative penalties for women turning to positive premiums in recent years.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文