Researching women and men 1996–2020: Is androcentrism still dominant?

• Main Authors: Thelwall, Mike, Abdullah, Abrizah, Fairclough, Ruth
• Format: Article
• Published: MIT Press Journals 2022
• Subjects: HQ The family. Marriage. Woman
• Online Access: http://eprints.um.edu.my/43321/; https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85128418893&doi=10.1162%2fqss_a_00173&partnerID=40&md5=8fbe08d7dac7059581bc66dc124f92fe

This article assesses the balance of research concerning women and men over the past quarter century using the crude heuristic of counting Scopus-indexed journal articles relating to women or men, as suggested by their titles or abstracts. A manual checking procedure together with a word-based heuristic was used to identify whether an article related to women or men. The heuristic includes explicit mentions of women and men, implicit mentions, and a set of gender-focused health issues and medical terminology. Based on the results, more published articles now relate to women than to men. Moreover, more than twice as many articles relate exclusively to women than exclusively to men, with the ratio increasing from 2.16 to 1 in 1996 to 2.25 to 1 in 2020. Monogender articles mostly addressed primarily female health issues (maternity, breast cancer, cervical cancer) with fewer about primarily male health issues (testicular cancer, pancreatic cancer, health needs of men who have sex with men). Some articles also explicitly addressed gender inequality, such as empowering female entrepreneurs. The findings suggest that the androcentrism of early science has eroded in terms of research topics. This apparent progress should be encouraging for women researchers and society. © 2022 Mike Thelwall, Abrizah Abdullah, and Ruth Fairclough.