{"id":9560,"date":"2021-07-22T09:14:51","date_gmt":"2021-07-22T09:14:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thepublicationplan.com\/?p=9560"},"modified":"2021-09-15T14:59:46","modified_gmt":"2021-09-15T14:59:46","slug":"use-of-altmetrics-could-rebalance-gender-bias-in-academic-performance-evaluation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thepublicationplan.com\/2021\/07\/22\/use-of-altmetrics-could-rebalance-gender-bias-in-academic-performance-evaluation\/","title":{"rendered":"Use of altmetrics could rebalance gender bias in academic performance evaluation"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Recent years have seen increasing evidence<\/a> of systematic gender bias against women working in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Whether unconscious or otherwise, this bias can see a woman\u2019s gender negatively affect the evaluation of their academic performance when traditional metrics are used. In a Nature Index<\/em> blog<\/a>, Bjarne Bartlett<\/a> and colleagues discuss their study, which examined how alternative metrics, or altmetrics, could help to rebalance this inequality.<\/p>\n

In academia, decisions regarding hiring, promotion, and tenure are often based on traditional evaluation metrics, such as citation counts and grant allocations, which have been found to disproportionately favour men. Altmetrics, on the other hand, measure the amount of online attention a paper receives on digital platforms, such as news sites and social media, and many journals now publish the Altmetric Attention Score<\/a> (AAS) for individual journal articles.<\/p>\n

Thanks to the broad nature of online audiences, altmetrics could effectively democratise research evaluation. To test this theory, the study<\/a> by Fortin et al, published in Scientometrics<\/a>,<\/em> analysed the AAS of over 200,000 articles published between 2011\u20132018 in 7 major journals\/preprint servers:<\/p>\n