Women’s and Men’s Authorship Experiences: A Prospective Meta-Analysis

Authorship Prospective Meta-Analysis

doi:10.1177/01492063251315701

Women’s and Men’s Authorship Experiences: A Prospective Meta-Analysis

Authorship Prospective Meta-Analysis

Department of Management & Marketing

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The opaqueness of author naming and ordering, when coupled with power dynamics, can lead to a number of disadvantages in academic careers. In this commentary, we investigate gender differences in authorship experiences in a large prospective meta-analytic study (k = 46; n = 3,565; 12 countries). We find that women’s and men’s authorship experiences differ significantly with women reporting greater prevalence of problematic behaviors. We present seven actionable recommendations for improving the receipt and reporting of intellectual credit. Such actions are needed to ensure fairness in authorship, which is one of the most powerful factors in academics’ career outcomes.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1273-1287
Number of pages	15
Journal	Journal of Management
Volume	51
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251315701
Publication status	Published - Apr 2025

Access to Document

10.1177/01492063251315701

Cite this

@article{3fdecd9569da4edda66e3dc96430e0d5,

title = "Women{\textquoteright}s and Men{\textquoteright}s Authorship Experiences: A Prospective Meta-Analysis",

abstract = "The opaqueness of author naming and ordering, when coupled with power dynamics, can lead to a number of disadvantages in academic careers. In this commentary, we investigate gender differences in authorship experiences in a large prospective meta-analytic study (k = 46; n = 3,565; 12 countries). We find that women{\textquoteright}s and men{\textquoteright}s authorship experiences differ significantly with women reporting greater prevalence of problematic behaviors. We present seven actionable recommendations for improving the receipt and reporting of intellectual credit. Such actions are needed to ensure fairness in authorship, which is one of the most powerful factors in academics{\textquoteright} career outcomes.",

author = "\{Authorship Prospective Meta-Analysis\} and Banks, \{George C.\} and Rasmussen, \{Lisa M.\} and Scott Tonidandel and Pollack, \{Jeffrey M.\} and Hausfeld, \{Mary M.\} and Courtney Williams and Albritton, \{Betsy H.\} and Allen, \{Joseph A.\} and Nicolas Bastardoz and Batchelor, \{John H.\} and Bennett, \{Andrew A.\} and Roman Briker and Castille, \{Christopher M.\} and Jong, \{Bart A. De\} and Elise Demeter and DeSimone, \{Justin A.\} and Field, \{James G.\} and Maria Figueroa-Armijos and Garcia, \{M. Fernanda\} and Gardner, \{William L.\} and Gish, \{J. Jeffrey\} and Giurge, \{Laura M.\} and Gonzalez-Brambila, \{Claudia N.\} and Gonz{\'a}lez-Morales, \{M. Gloria\} and Lorenz Graf-Vlachy and Gupta, \{Roopak Kumar\} and Hinojosa, \{Amanda S.\} and Zion Howard and Sven Kepes and Tine K{\"o}hler and Kong, \{Dejun Tony\} and Markus Langer and Loi, \{Teng lat\} and Maher, \{Liam P.\} and Chao Miao and Mithani, \{Murad A.\} and Nair, \{Lakshmi Balachandran\} and Obenauer, \{William G.\} and O{\textquoteright}Boyle, \{Ernest H.\} and Pierce, \{Jason R.\} and Powell, \{Deborah M.\} and Roni Reiter-Palmon and Rupp, \{Deborah E.\} and Srinivasan Tatachari and Thomas, \{Jane S.\} and Tiia Vissak and Jako Volschenk and Chen Wang and Whelpley, \{Christopher E.\} and Hans-Georg Wolff",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2025.",

year = "2025",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1177/01492063251315701",

language = "English",

volume = "51",

pages = "1273--1287",

journal = "Journal of Management",

issn = "0149-2063",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Women’s and Men’s Authorship Experiences: A Prospective Meta-Analysis

AU - Authorship Prospective Meta-Analysis

AU - Banks, George C.

AU - Rasmussen, Lisa M.

AU - Tonidandel, Scott

AU - Pollack, Jeffrey M.

AU - Hausfeld, Mary M.

AU - Williams, Courtney

AU - Albritton, Betsy H.

AU - Allen, Joseph A.

AU - Bastardoz, Nicolas

AU - Batchelor, John H.

AU - Bennett, Andrew A.

AU - Briker, Roman

AU - Castille, Christopher M.

AU - Jong, Bart A. De

AU - Demeter, Elise

AU - DeSimone, Justin A.

AU - Field, James G.

AU - Figueroa-Armijos, Maria

AU - Garcia, M. Fernanda

AU - Gardner, William L.

AU - Gish, J. Jeffrey

AU - Giurge, Laura M.

AU - Gonzalez-Brambila, Claudia N.

AU - González-Morales, M. Gloria

AU - Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz

AU - Gupta, Roopak Kumar

AU - Hinojosa, Amanda S.

AU - Howard, Zion

AU - Kepes, Sven

AU - Köhler, Tine

AU - Kong, Dejun Tony

AU - Langer, Markus

AU - Loi, Teng lat

AU - Maher, Liam P.

AU - Miao, Chao

AU - Mithani, Murad A.

AU - Nair, Lakshmi Balachandran

AU - Obenauer, William G.

AU - O’Boyle, Ernest H.

AU - Pierce, Jason R.

AU - Powell, Deborah M.

AU - Reiter-Palmon, Roni

AU - Rupp, Deborah E.

AU - Tatachari, Srinivasan

AU - Thomas, Jane S.

AU - Vissak, Tiia

AU - Volschenk, Jako

AU - Wang, Chen

AU - Whelpley, Christopher E.

AU - Wolff, Hans-Georg

PY - 2025/4

Y1 - 2025/4

N2 - The opaqueness of author naming and ordering, when coupled with power dynamics, can lead to a number of disadvantages in academic careers. In this commentary, we investigate gender differences in authorship experiences in a large prospective meta-analytic study (k = 46; n = 3,565; 12 countries). We find that women’s and men’s authorship experiences differ significantly with women reporting greater prevalence of problematic behaviors. We present seven actionable recommendations for improving the receipt and reporting of intellectual credit. Such actions are needed to ensure fairness in authorship, which is one of the most powerful factors in academics’ career outcomes.

AB - The opaqueness of author naming and ordering, when coupled with power dynamics, can lead to a number of disadvantages in academic careers. In this commentary, we investigate gender differences in authorship experiences in a large prospective meta-analytic study (k = 46; n = 3,565; 12 countries). We find that women’s and men’s authorship experiences differ significantly with women reporting greater prevalence of problematic behaviors. We present seven actionable recommendations for improving the receipt and reporting of intellectual credit. Such actions are needed to ensure fairness in authorship, which is one of the most powerful factors in academics’ career outcomes.

UR - https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251315701

U2 - 10.1177/01492063251315701

DO - 10.1177/01492063251315701

M3 - Article

SN - 0149-2063

VL - 51

SP - 1273

EP - 1287

JO - Journal of Management

JF - Journal of Management

IS - 4

ER -

Women’s and Men’s Authorship Experiences: A Prospective Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this