Paper detail

Robust Quantification of Gender Disparity in Pre-Modern English Literature using Natural Language Processing

Research has continued to shed light on the extent and significance of gender disparity in social, cultural and economic spheres. More recently, computational tools from the Natural Language Processing (NLP) literature have been proposed for measuring such disparity using relatively extensive datasets and empirically rigorous methodologies. In this paper, we contribute to this line of research by studying gender disparity, at scale, in copyright-expired literary texts published in the pre-modern period (defined in this work as the period ranging from the mid-nineteenth through the mid-twentieth century). One of the challenges in using such tools is to ensure quality control, and by extension, trustworthy statistical analysis. Another challenge is in using materials and methods that are publicly available and have been established for some time, both to ensure that they can be used and vetted in the future, and also, to add confidence to the methodology itself. We present our solution to addressing these challenges, and using multiple measures, demonstrate the significant discrepancy between the prevalence of female characters and male characters in pre-modern literature. The evidence suggests that the discrepancy declines when the author is female. The discrepancy seems to be relatively stable as we plot data over the decades in this century-long period. Finally, we aim to carefully describe both the limitations and ethical caveats associated with this study, and others like it.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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.