Paper detail

On the relationship between set-based and network-based measures of gender homophily in scholarly publications

There is an increased interest in the scientific community in the problem of measuring gender homophily in co-authorship on scholarly publications (Eisen, 2016). For a given set of publications and co-authorships, we assume that author identities have not been disambiguated in that we do not know when one person is an author on more than one paper. In this case, one way to think about measuring gender homophily is to consider all observed co-authorship pairs and obtain a set-based gender homophily coefficient (e.g., Bergstrom et al., 2016). Another way is to consider papers as observed disjoint networks of co-authors and use a network-based assortativity coefficient (e.g., Newman, 2003). In this note, we review both metrics and show that the gender homophily set-based index is equivalent to the gender assortativity network-based coefficient with properly weighted edges.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.