Gender distribution across topics in the top five economics journals: a machine learning approach

  1. Conde-Ruiz, J. Ignacio 2
  2. Ganuza, Juan-José 1
  3. García, Manu 3
  4. Puch, Luis A. 2
  1. 1 Universitat Pompeu Fabra and Barcelona GSE, Barcelona
  2. 2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid and ICAE
  3. 3 Washington University in St. Louis and ICAE, St. Louis, MO, USA
Mostrar afiliaciones +
Revista:
SERIEs

ISSN: 1869-4187,  1869-4195

Año de publicación: 2021

Volumen: 13

Número: 1-2

Páginas: 269-308

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1007/S13209-021-00256-2 GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: SERIEs

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

We analyze text data in all the articles published in the top five (T5) economics journals between 2002 and 2019 in order to find gender differences in their research approach. We implement an unsupervised machine learning algorithm: the structural topic model (STM), so as to incorporate gender document-level meta-data into a probabilistic text model. This algorithm characterizes jointly the set of latent topics that best fits our data (the set of abstracts) and how the documents/abstracts are allocated to each topic. Latent topics are mixtures over words where each word has a probability of belonging to a topic after controlling by journal name and publication year (the meta-data). Thus, the topics may capture research fields but also other more subtle characteristics related to the way in which the articles are written. We find that females are unevenly distributed over the estimated latent topics. This and other findings rely on “automatically” generated built-in data given the contents in the abstracts of the articles in the T5 journals, without any arbitrary allocation of texts to particular categories (as JEL codes, or research areas).

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Bagues M, Campa P (2017) Can gender quotas in candidate lists empower women? Evidence from a regression discontinuity design (12149)
  • Bayer A, Rouse CE (2016) Diversity in the economics profession: a new attack on an old problem. J Econ Perspect 30(4):221–42
  • Beneito P, Boscá JE, Ferri J, García M (2021) Gender imbalance across subfields in economics: when does it start? J Hum Cap 15(3):469–511
  • Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI (2003) Latent Dirichlet allocation. J Mach Learn Res 3:993–1022
  • Boustan L, Langan A (2019) Variation in women’s success across PhD programs in economics. J Econ Perspect 33(1):23–42
  • Buckley C (1985) Implementation of the SMART information retrieval system. Technical Report, USA
  • Cabrales A, García M, Puch LA (2018) “Gendered Language in the British Press,” Mimeo COSME: Gender at 2018 Meetings of the Spanish Economic Association
  • Card D, DellaVigna S (2013) Nine facts about top journals in economics. J Econ Lit 51(1):144–61
  • Card D, DellaVigna S, Funk P, Iriberri N (2019) Are referees and editors in economics gender neutral?*. Q J Econ 135(1):269–327
  • Chari A, Goldsmith-Pinkham P (2017) Gender representation in economics across topics and time: evidence from the NBER summer institute. Working Paper 23953, National Bureau of Economic Research
  • Chevalier J (2020) The 2020 report of the committee on the status of women in the economics profession
  • Conde-Ruiz JI, Ganuza J-J, Profeta P (2017) Statistical discrimination and the efficiency of quotas. Fedea Working Papers
  • Conde-Ruiz JI, Ganuza JJ, Profeta P (2021) Statistical discrimination and committees. Fedea Working Papers (2021-06)
  • Dolado J, Felgueroso F, Almunia M (2012) Are men and women-economists evenly distributed across research fields? Some new empirical evidence. SERIEs J Span Econ Assoc 3(3):367–393
  • Gelman A, Meng X, Stern H (1996) Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies. Stat Sinica 733–807
  • Hansen S, McMahon M, Prat A (2018) Transparency and deliberation within the FOMC: a computational linguistics approach. Q J Econ 133(2):801–870
  • Heckman James J, Moktan Sidharth (2020) Publishing and promotion in economics: the tyranny of the top five. J Econ Lit 58(2):419–70
  • Hengel E (2020) Publishing while female. Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review. Cambridge working papers in economics 1753, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge
  • Hengel E, Moon E (2020) Gender and quality at top economics journals. Working papers 202001, University of Liverpool, Department of Economics
  • Lundberg S, Stearns J (2019) Women in economics: stalled progress. J Econ Perspect 33(1):3–22
  • Mimno D, Wallach HM, Talley E, Leenders M, McCallum A (2011) optimizing semantic coherence in topic models, pp 262–272
  • Roberts ME, Stewart BM, Tingley D, Lucas C, Leder-Luis J, Gadarian SK, Albertson B, Rand DG (2014) Structural topic models for open-ended survey responses. Am J Polit Sci 58(4):1064–1082
  • Roberts ME, Stewart BM, Tingley D (2019) STM: an R package for structural topic models. J Stat Softw Artic 91(2):1–40
  • Siniscalchi M, Veronesi P (2020) Self-image Bias and lost talent (28308)
  • Tang C, Ross K, Saxena N, Chen R (2011) What’s in a name: a study of names, gender inference, and gender behavior in Facebook, pp 344–356