Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research:
A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
Pautas de autoría y colaboración en las investigaciones en periodismo. Análisis
de género de las publicaciones más citadas
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
| 35
July-December of 2026
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
How to cite this article:
Ventura-Cisquella, A.; Vállez, M.; Codina, L. and Freixa, P. (2026). Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender
Analysis of the Most Cited Publications.
Doxa Comunicación
, 43, pp. 35-57.
https//doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.2870
Anna Ventura-Cisquella
is a predoctoral researcher in Information and Communication at the University of Barcelona.
She holds a bachelor’s degree in Social Anthropology from the Complutense University of Madrid and a master’s degree
in Social Communication Research from Pompeu Fabra University. She also completed studies in Film and Television
Screenwriting at the Madrid Film Institute and earned a postgraduate qualication in SEO for communicators at
the Barcelona School of Management. She is a collaborating researcher on the CUVICOM Research Project of the
Department of Library and Information Science and Audiovisual Communication at the University of Barcelona.
Barcelona University, Spain
[email protected]
ORCID:
0000-0001-8619-2194
Mari Vállez
has a PhD in Social Communication from Universitat Pompeu Fabra and is a member of the Centre de
Recerca en Informació, Comunicació i Cultura (CRICC), of Universitat de Barcelona. She is a lecturer at the Department
of Librarianship, Information Science and Audiovisual Communication at the Universitat de Barcelona, and is also
the coordinator of the double degree program in Information Management and Digital Documentation + Audiovisual
Communication.
Barcelona University, Spain
[email protected]
ORCID:
0000-0002-3284-2590
Lluís Codina
is a professor at the Faculty of Communication, teaching in the undergraduate degrees in Journalism and
Audiovisual Communication, as well as in the University Master’s Degree in Communication Research. He is a researcher
in the Department of Communication at Pompeu Fabra University, co-director of the Cybermedia Observatory, and has
served as coordinator of the Research Unit in Journalism and Digital Documentation (UPF). He is also a professor at the
Barcelona School of Management – UPF. He is a co-founder and a member of the editorial team of the academic journal
Hipertext.net.
Pompeu Fabra University, Spain
[email protected]
ORCID:
0000-0001-7020-1631
is content is published under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License. International License CC BY-NC 4.0
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
36 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
1. Introduction
e reduction of the gender gap is a priority in the eld of research and science. For this reason, the European Union has
launched, within the Horizon Europe Programme, the
Horizon Europe guidance on gender equality plans
(European
Commission, 2021), which helps organizations meet the eligibility criterion of having a Gender Equality Plan for research. is
initiative highlights the importance of sex and gender analysis in promoting equality within the new European Research Area.
In addition, the European Commission’s triennial reports
She Figures
(2021, 2018, 2015, 2012) underscore the need to monitor
progress toward equity.
Pere Freixa
is a professor in the Department of Communication at Pompeu Fabra University. He holds a PhD in Fine
Arts from the University of Barcelona and a master’s degree in Interactive Multimedia from the Polytechnic University
of Catalonia. He is a member of DigiDoc, an AGAUR-recognized consolidated research group, where he specializes in
photographic image, graphical interface, and interaction. He has directed and participated in numerous master’s and
postgraduate programs specializing in visual research, interactivity, and interactive design. He is the editor-in-chief of
the academic journal
Hipertext.net.
Pompeu Fabra University, Spain
[email protected]
ORCID:0000-0002-9199-1270
Recibido: 18/12/2024 - Aceptado: 20/02/2026 - En edición: 11/03/2026 - Publicado: 01/07/2026
Resumen:
Este estudio analiza las dinámicas de género en las autorías de las inves
-
tigaciones de más impacto en periodismo, basándose en 200 artículos
de revistas indexadas en Scopus, publicados entre 2013 y 2023. Para el
análisis, se utilizan algoritmos de clasicación de género, complemen
-
tados con una vericación manual basada en la autoexpresión textual.
Los resultados muestran una predominancia masculina, con un 65% de
publicaciones rmadas por hombres, que ocupan mayoritariamente las
primeras y últimas posiciones de autoría. Predominan las colaboracio
-
nes exclusivamente entre hombres y las colaboraciones mixtas (hombres
y mujeres), mientras que las colaboraciones únicamente entre mujeres
son minoritarias.
En cuanto a las temáticas abordadas, se centran en
las innovaciones y cambios económicos y tecnológicos en el periodismo,
así como en su relación con la comunicación política. Se observa una
escasez de publicaciones sobre inclusión de género y diversidad
.
No se
identican diferencias signicativas en la selección de temáticas según
el género de la autoría.
Palabras clave:
Periodismo; Producción cientíca; Género de las autorías; Brecha de
género; Scopus.
Received: 18/12/2024 - Accepted: 20/02/2026 - Early access: 11/03/2026 - Published: 01/07/2026
Abstract:
is study analyzes gender dynamics in the authorship of high-impact
journalism research, based on 200 articles from Scopus-indexed
journals published between 2013 and 2023. To conduct the analysis,
gender classication algorithms were used, complemented by manual
verication based on textual self-expression. e results reveal a
male predominance, with 65% of publications authored by men,
who predominantly occupy the rst and last positions of authorship.
Collaborations exclusively among men and mixed collaborations
(men and women) are more common, while collaborations solely
among women are less frequent. e topics covered primarily focus on
innovations and economic and technological changes in journalism,
as well as its relationship with political communication. ere is a
notable scarcity of publications addressing gender inclusion and
diversity. No signicant dierences were identied in topic selection
based on the authors' gender.
Keywords:
Journalism; Scientic Production; Authorship Gender; Gender Gap;
Scopus.
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 37
In parallel with these initiatives, various actions have been implemented to improve education and gender equality in
communication and journalism, most notably the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing (United Nations, 1995). is
conference emphasized the importance of women’s participation in decision-making environments and in the media. Other
projects, such as the UNESCO–UNITWIN Network on Gender, Media and ICTs (García-Ramos
et al.
, 2020), seek to reduce the
gender gap in the eld of journalism research and to train students and researchers in this area from a gender perspective.
Despite these advances in the study of gender inequality within communication research (Feeley & Yang, 2022; Rajkó
et al.
,
2023; Freelon
et al.
, 2023), it has been observed that there are still few academic studies that analyze this gap specically
in the eld of journalism. erefore, this study aims to analyze gender dynamics in the authorship of the most inuential
publications in journalism between 2013 and 2023, using the Scopus academic database. In particular, it focuses on gender-
based collaboration dynamics among the authors of these publications, while also analyzing the thematic areas addressed in
these academic articles.
e following objectives have been dened, along with their corresponding research questions:
O.1 To analyze the gender of authorship of the most cited scientic publications in the eld of journalism indexed in Scopus.
Research questions for this objective:
–
What is the overall distribution of authorship by gender in the publications analyzed?
–
How does the position of co-authorship vary according to the gender of the authors?
–
What gender-based collaboration patterns occur among authors?
O.2 To examine the topics addressed and their possible relationship with the gender of the authorship. Research questions for
this objective:
–
What are the most recurring topics in the analyzed articles based on the keywords?
–
Is there a relationship between the gender of the authorship and the choice of topics?
–
In the following section, the existing literature is reviewed with an emphasis on gender inequality in academic production,
paying special attention to this gap in the eld of communication and journalism. Next, the methodology and the tool used
to identify the gender of the authorship of the publications are described. en, the results are presented, followed by a
discussion of the obtained data. Finally, the conclusions, limitations, and directions for future research are outlined.
2. eoretical Framework
2.1. e Gender Gap in Science
In recent years, various initiatives have been adopted to reduce the gender gap. Among them, Resolution 70/212 (United
Nations, 2016), which promotes the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, stands out. is resolution seeks to
address the exclusion of women from science and the so-called “Matilda Eect,” named in honor of the American suragist
38 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
and feminist critic Matilda J. Gage, who at the end of the 19th century observed this phenomenon whereby the work of women
scientists has historically been overlooked (Rossiter, 1993; Lincoln
et al.
, 2012).
is gender inequality persists, as evidenced by the underrepresentation of women in prestigious programs, in research group
leadership positions (Rodríguez-Baiget
et al.
, 2024), and in decision-making roles (Azizi
et al.
, 2022; Fauzi
et al.
, 2024), in a
context where research evaluation bodies have also demonstrated gender biases (Foss & Olsen, 2023; Bustelo & Salido, 2024;
James
et al.
, 2024).
Among these biases, studies have shown that certain stereotypes and prejudices tend to associate high-level intellectual
ability more frequently with men than with women (Bian
et al.
, 2016; Nyul
et al.
, 2024). Furthermore, academic dynamics
have often failed to prioritize work–life balance, which can make it more dicult for women with caregiving responsibilities to
maintain the same level of academic productivity (Ahmad, 2017; Gallardo, 2020; Pecis & Touboulic, 2024). In addition, the lack
of eective measures and bias against research promoting equal opportunities among researchers have created additional
barriers to inclusion (Cislak
et al.
, 2018).
is lack of interest in addressing inequalities leads to a loss in knowledge production and innovative discoveries, as equal
opportunities are not oered to those who are capable and qualied (Joshi, 2014). e
She Figures
report (European Commission,
2021) indicates that in Europe, women occupy only 26% of senior positions in the university sector. Furthermore, according
to UNESCO data (2021), women represent only 33.3% of researchers worldwide. is gure is linked to the phenomenon of
the “sticky oor” (Dahlvig
et al.
, 2024), which describes how many women remain stuck in precarious jobs with limited career
prospects. e situation worsens when considering intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989), as multiple forms of discrimination –
such as gender, class or race– reinforce these inequalities, particularly beneting cisgender men from the Global North.
e data show that women researchers still face obstacles in advancing in prestigious careers and have less access to
collaboration networks and leadership roles (Segovia-Saiz
et al.
, 2020). e subtle limitation of women’s career advancement
within organizations has been termed the “glass ceiling” or “leaky pipeline,” a phenomenon that highlights how gender
disadvantages become more pronounced as a woman attempts to move up the hierarchy (Cotter
et al.
, 2001; Dahlvig
et al.
,
2024). For all these reasons, and considering that perceptions of the gender gap vary according to elds of specialization
(García-González
et al.
, 2019), it is necessary to continue providing data on the roles and positions that women researchers
occupy across dierent areas and research topics today.
2.2. e Gender Gap in Academic Production and Citation
When evaluating the roles that women researchers occupy and the development of their careers, several factors that have
traditionally been used to measure academic authority and recognition are typically considered –primarily, the number of
published articles and the citations those articles receive (academic citation). Various investigations on the gender gap in
science have highlighted an imbalance in the number of articles produced by men and women (Hagemann, 2022; Castonguay,
2023) by studying these indicators. is imbalance is more pronounced in those articles that receive more citations, and in
the rst authorships (Bendels
et al.
, 2018; Chary
et al.
, 2021). On the other hand, some studies indicate that performance in
terms of publications is comparable between men and women, suggesting that these similarities are not sucient to justify the
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 39
observed inequalities in attaining academic ranks (Frandsen
et al.
, 2020). It has also been noted that, in any case, the gender
gap in academic authorship is complex and varies depending on the region, eld of study, and level in the academic career
(Chan & Torgler, 2020; Demeter & Toth, 2020).
Studies examining the number of citations that publications receive are more consistent and show a more evident gender
inequality. ese investigations indicate that some male authors have self-citation rates much higher than would be expected
(Ghiasi
et al.
, 2018). In addition, male authors tend to collaborate primarily with other men, creating networks in which they
cite each other (Broderick & Casadevall, 2019; Dinu, 2021). ese male networks also facilitate hiring and promotion through
so-called “old boy networks” (Friedmann, 2018), a term that has been used to describe informal collaboration networks in
which men support each other, beneting those who share the same educational background or academic or social circles.
For these reasons, it is important not to focus solely on reviewing authorship and productivity but to thoroughly investigate
the collaboration dynamics and relationships among authors across various disciplines, considering a gender perspective.
2.3. e Gender Gap in Publications in the Field of Journalism and Communication
Esparcia
et al.
(2012) found that, although the gender gap in academic production in communication and journalism was
decreasing and the pace of publication was becoming more balanced, male authorship still predominated in academic articles
in this eld. An imbalance has also been noted in the number of citations that publications receive –this time more evident–
between citations of men and women (Knobloch-Westerwick
et al.
, 2013; Goyanes
et al.
, 2025), as well as inequality in access
to collaboration networks (Pottho & Zimmermann, 2017; Feeley & Yang, 2022).
Other studies (Rajkó
et al.
, 2024; Song
et al.
, 2023) have delved into gender bias by analyzing data on academic performance
in communication at an international level, noting that although articles by female academics are viewed more often, they are
cited less than those of their male colleagues. Furthermore, these studies show that female academics have less inuence on
social networks due to their exclusion from inuential networks and their limited use of social connections.
In line with these research trends, this article aims to explore the collaboration dynamics in the eld of communication with
an analysis based on the gender of the authorship of the 200 most cited publications in journalism between 2013 and 2023.
e analysis of authorship and collaborations is complemented by a study of topics, to determine whether a correlation can be
established between the gender of authors and the choice of topics and subelds of study.
Considering gender bias through a binary dichotomous division is currently a subject of debate and is widely questioned
within academia. Beyond gender diversity, the relevance of continuing to rely on this model is challenged due to the impact
that such a delimitation has on results (Westbrook & Saperstein, 2015; Magliozzi
et al.
, 2016; Lindqvist
et al.
, 2020). Aware of this
issue, this research nevertheless recognizes the need to continue providing data that, while not disregarding the importance of
a greater understanding of gender diversity, allow for awareness and action regarding the structural biases that facilitate men’s
professional advancement over other identities. As Cook and Cusack (2011) point out, the presence of stereotypes, traditions,
and legislation in most societies continues to reinforce these biases, despite corrective policies and actions implemented by
institutions and states.
40 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
3. Methodology
e data were collected in early January 2024 using the Scopus academic database, due to its broader coverage of social science
journals than Web of Science (Mongeon & Paul-Hus, 2016). e 200 most cited articles containing the keyword “Journalism”
were selected in the title, abstract, or keywords to cover all forms of journalism.
Articles published between January 2013 and December 2023 were considered to allow for an adequate accumulation of
citations because, in the social sciences, the dissemination and accumulation of citations tends to be slower than in other
elds (Dorta-González & Gómez-Déniz, 2022). e sample of the most cited publications was selected because, although
the number of citations is not a clear indicator of research quality, there is generally a positive relationship between the two
(elwall
et al.
, 2023).
e indexing of all publications in journals ranked in the top quartiles was veried to ensure the relevance of the sample to
correct for potential biases.
e 200 most cited publications out of 11,824 articles for this period represent the intellectual core of the eld and allow the
formation of a manageable and representative set with a sucient number of citations, following previous studies with similar
samples (Hernández-González
et al.
, 2022; Mavrovounis
et al.
, 2023).
Additionally, specic criteria were applied to ensure the relevance of the sample: only articles in the social sciences were
included using Scopus’ “Subject Area” lter. Articles outside this eld were excluded to focus the study on journalism as an
academic discipline, which is typically classied within the social sciences (De Filippo & Sanz-Casado, 2018).
Publications that were not academic articles, such as book chapters, conference papers, and letters, were also excluded
because Scopus specializes in indexing scientic journals. Additionally, recent studies indicate that the coverage of books and
other formats is limited in this database (Pranckut
ė
, 2021).
After obtaining the document set, the gender of the authorship of the 200 most cited scientic publications in the eld of
journalism was analyzed by extracting rst names and surnames from the “authors” eld. In order to assign the gender of each
author based on the name eld, the NamSor app V.2 tool was used (Namsor™ Applied Onomastics, NamSor SAS, Versailles,
France). NamSor uses articial intelligence to provide detailed information about the gender of a name, allowing the statistical
determination, from a large dataset of 7.5 billion references, of whether a name is more likely to be male, female, or unknown
(NamSor, 2024). is tool was selected because various comparative analyses of similar applications rank it among the best
for gender classication, with an error rate below 5% (Santamaría & Mihaljevi
ć
, 2018) and one of the lowest inaccuracy rates
(Sebo, 2021).
It is important to note that a binary gender system (male/female) was used, which does not consider gender self-identication
or the inclusion of non-binary categories which is a limitation of this research.
A manual search validated the results to reduce errors in the automatic gender assignment. Proles on ResearchGate and
Google Scholar were consulted, and the aliated university webpages were reviewed, looking for textual self-expression
evidence such as the use of pronouns. e comparison between the gender assignment performed by NamSor and the
manual assignment based on textual self-expression evidence revealed n= 17 discrepancies between the two methodologies.
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 41
is represents a sample error proportion of 5.67% (
p
̂
= 0.0567). Considering this value, the sample size (N= 300), and a 95%
condence level, a condence interval for the error proportion was calculated, indicating that the true error percentage is,
with 95% certainty, between 3.06% and 8.28%. erefore, the observed error proportion in the sample (5.67%) falls within this
interval, which reinforces the validity of the analysis.
Among the 17 discrepant results of the name assignments, the manual identication revealed a greater presence of male authors
compared to female authors, relative to the gender distribution provided by NamSor. Additionally, the geographic diversity of
the names with non-matching results was assessed, showing that ten of them are of Asian origin, ve are of European origin,
and one is of African origin. Name and surname strings of Asian origin exhibited the highest number of divergent results.
Once the gender disambiguation of authorship was completed, the 200 publications were analyzed according to three
dimensions:
1.
Representation of Authorship by Gender.
2.
Gender-Based Collaboration Dynamics.
3.
Publication Topics and eir Possible Relationship with the Gender of Authorship.
4.
e indicators dened for each dimension are presented below.
Dimension 1: Representation of Authorship by Gender
is dimensión analyses the representation of authorship by binary gender, using the following indicators: total number of
authorships (N), number of female authorships (n₂), and number of male authorships (n₁). To do this, the list of all authors
was rst extracted and their gender assigned. en, each article was assigned the total number of authorships, specifying the
number of female and male authorships and their positions (rst author, intermediate authors, or last author).
Dimension 2: Gender-Based Collaboration Dynamics
e next step is to analyze gender-based collaboration patterns, that is, how authorship is structured in multi-author
publications. ree types of collaborative patterns were considered: if the authorship includes only women (female), if it
includes only men (male), and if at least one man and one woman collaborate (mixed).
Dimension 3: Topics and Characteristics of the Publications
A narrative synthesis of the 200 titles and abstracts was conducted, relating them to the gender and collaboration pattern of
the authorship of each article in order to analyze their possible inuence on topic selection. Subsequently, the most frequent
keywords were grouped into three major thematic blocks. A total of 1,209 keywords were identied, of which 150 appeared
more than once. Of these 150, those referring to methodologies or theoretical approaches, such as “discourse analysis,” were
excluded in order to focus solely on thematic trends rather than on the tools or methods used in the research.
42 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
4. Results
e results of the analysis of the 200 articles are presented below, according to the dimensions and indicators described in the
Methodology section.
4.1. Representation of Authorship by Gender
e 200 articles in the sample account for a total of N= 413 authorships, with a mean of X̅= 2.06 authors per article. e
standard deviation is SD= 0.7, indicating that most articles have between 1.3 and 2.7 authorships. However, the sample
includes articles with up to 11 authorships as well as others with a single author. Figure 1 shows the gender distribution of the
N= 413 authorships, with n₁= 267 (65%) male authorships and n₂= 146 (35%) female authorships. e ratio between female and
male authorships indicates that there are 1.8 male authorships for every female authorship.
If we analyze the total number of distinct authors involved in the articles, a total of N= 300, the ratio decreases slightly to
1.5 male authorships per female authorship. us, of the n= 300 total authors, n₁= 179 (60%) are men and n₂= 121 (40%) are
women (the data are presented without a gure, as they are considered suciently clear in the text; Figure 1 corresponds only
to the overall distribution of the 413 authorships).
Figure 1. Distribution of Article Authorship by Gender (
n= 413
)
Source: Own elaboration
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 43
When examining in greater detail the gender distribution among authors who have published a single article (Figure 2), a total
of n= 240 individuals are identied. Of these, n₂= 98 (40.8%) are women and n₁= 142 (59.1%) are men. e male-to-female
ratio in this category is 1.5, indicating that single-publication authorship maintains a ratio similar to that observed previously.
Figure 2. Authors with a Single Publication
(n= 240)
Source: Own elaboration
e number of the n= 300 individuals who authored more than one article totalled n= 60. Figure 3 shows their distribution by
gender: n₂= 22 are women authors (36.6%) and n₁= 38 are men authors (63.3%). is represents a ratio of 1.72 men publishing
more than one article for every woman doing so, indicating a considerably higher proportion of men than women among
authors who appear as signatories on more than one article.
44 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
Figure 3. Authors with More an One Publication
(n= 60)
Source: Own elaboration
It is observed that as the number of publications increases –that is, as an author appears as a signatory of more than one article
in the sample– authorship becomes increasingly masculinized. us, among authors with more than two articles, 66.6% are
male authors (gures at this level are not included). If we examine authors who have signed more than ve articles, they are
exclusively men.
In the authorship positions established in the analyzed articles, the order of authorship is identied based on the gender
variable.
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 45
Figure 4. Authorship Positions Held by Women and Men in Each Article
(n= 413)
Source: Own elaboration
Figure 4 shows that n₁= 131 male authors appear as rst authors, representing 31.7% of the total, in contrast to n₂= 69 female
authors, who account for 16.7%. is indicates a ratio of nearly twice as many male as female authors in this position. In
intermediate positions, a smaller dierence is observed, with n₁= 51 male authors (12.3%) and n₂= 35 female authors (8.47%),
corresponding to a percentage dierence of only 3.83 points between male and female intermediate authorships. However,
in last-author positions, the disparity becomes more pronounced again, with n₁= 85 male authors (20.58%) and n₂= 42 female
authors (10.1%), representing a percentage dierence of 10.48 points between men and women.
4.2. Gender-Based Collaboration Dynamics
e data presented so far summarize the representation and positions of authorships based on gender. is information can be
complemented by identifying collaboration patterns among researchers of dierent genders in the publication of the articles.
Prior to this analysis, it should be noted that, of the N= 200 articles analyzed, a total of n= 127 articles –i.e., 63.5% of the sample–
were developed as multi-author collaborations.
Figure 5 analyzes the percentage of the three types of gender-based collaboration in these publications.
46 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
Figure 5. Collaboration Patterns in Multi-Author Articles
(N= 127)
Source: Own elaboration
It is observed that n= 72 publications (56.7%) were mixed collaborations, involving authorships of both genders; n= 46
publications (36.2%) were developed by male authors only (male collaboration pattern); and only n= 9 publications (7.1%)
were collaborations exclusively among female authors (female collaboration pattern).
A disparity in the positions held by men and women can again be identied in the composition of the mixed collaborations.
Of the total publications in this category (72), in the rst-author positions, n₁= 42 of the authorships are male (55.5%),
while n₂= 32 are female (44.4%), indicating a gender gap of nearly 10 percentage points. is discrepancy is repeated in the
last-author positions, where n₁= 39 (54.1%) are male authors compared to n₂= 33 (45.8%) female authors, again showing a
dierence of almost 10 percentage points (no gure is presented at this level). ese data suggest a systematic trend in the
gender distribution of authorship positions, with men occupying a higher proportion in both rst and last positions.
4.3. Research Topics and Characteristics
e results of the second research objective, which aims to analyze the topics and their possible relationship with the gender
of authorship, are presented below.
To identify the topics, the keywords, titles, and abstracts of the 200 articles were reviewed, as explained in the corresponding
section of the Methodology. e keywords were grouped into three major thematic blocks, which are summarized in Table 1.
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 47
Table 1. ematic Blocks and Keywords of the Articles
ematic Block
Keywords
1.
Technological and Economic Transformation
Social media, computational journalism, Twitter, data journalism,
digital journalism, automated journalism,
algorithms, technology,
robot journalism, online news, big data, innovation, algorithm
journalism, platforms, computing assisted reporting, Facebook,
data, virtual reality, automation, immersive journalism, media
economics, natural language generation, authority, software
development, platforms, online journalism, innovation
journalism, Youtube, mobile journalism
2.
Audience Transformation
Audience, engagement, emotion, metrics, user comments,
branding, analytics, user generated content, web analytics, news
perception, interactivity, counter publics, native advertising, web
metrics, reciprocity, personal branding
3.
Ideological Transformation and Critical PerspectivePolitical communication, fake news, objectivity, misinformation,
participatory journalism, transparency, democracy, fact-checking,
gatekeeping, journalism ethics, journalistic roles, verication,
credibility, disinformation, hackers, citizen journalism, role
conception, public sphere, news values, investigative journalism,
open source, norms and routines, social movements, populism,
verication, hackers, politic news, professionalism, cultural
capital, ethics, expertise, climate change, science journalism,
institucions accuracy, trust, professional ideology, professional
norms, partisanship, power, gender, online harassment,
professional ideology, sensationalism
Source: Own elaboration
From the analysis of the publications, it is observed that in recent years, the transformations journalism has undergone to adapt
to the new media environment are being addressed. Topics explored include the impact of the platform economy, interaction
with increasingly fragmented audiences, the evolution of the journalistic profession, and the ethical and critical perspectives
on these changes. Additionally, a notable portion of these articles focuses on how these transformations inuence political
communication.
Furthermore, the gender of individual authorships (female or male) and collaboration patterns (female, male, and mixed)
were analyzed in relation to the topics, with no observable relationship found between the gender variable and the choice of
research topics. In short, no substantial dierence between women and men could be veried regarding the topics addressed.
On the other hand, topics related to gender and diversity inclusion have a very limited presence in the analyzed sample,
with only three articles explicitly addressing these issues. is scarcity contrasts with the predominance of research focused
on political power, misinformation, and the inuence of large technology corporations—areas traditionally associated with
power dynamics linked to masculinity.
48 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
5. Discussion
In recent years, growing inequities in academia have been observed, characterized by hyperproductivity, extreme
competition, and the increasing precarization of research sta within a neoliberal context (Jones & Floyd, 2023; Lombardo
et
al.
, 2024). is system evaluates academic career progression through quantitative indices of productivity and citation, which,
according to various studies (Alcalde-González & Belli, 2024; Johansson
et al.
, 2024), can lead to situations of inequality that
disproportionately aect women. Historically, women have been made invisible in academia (Rossiter, 1993; Lincoln
et al.
,
2012) and continue to face multiple structural barriers limiting their advancement (Ahmad, 2017; Gallardo, 2020; Pecis &
Touboulic, 2024). ese barriers are reected in the lower presence of women in prestigious academic programs, scientic
leadership positions (Rodríguez-Baiget
et al.
, 2024), and decision-making spaces (Azizi
et al.
, 2021; Fauzi
et al.
, 2024), within
an evaluative system with persistent gender biases (Foss & Olsen, 2023; Bustelo & Salido, 2024; James
et al.
, 2024). Stereotypes
associating high intellectual capacity with men (Bian
et al.
, 2017; Nyul
et al.
, 2024) and the limited institutional attention to
work-life balance further disproportionately aect women.
e research presented here reveals that authorships in the most cited academic publications in journalism remain inequitable,
with a male overrepresentation in the distribution of the sample. Furthermore, it was observed that in the selected sample, as
the number of publications by an author increases –that is, when an author appears as a signatory on more than one article–
the male presence in authorships also increases.
ese ndings are consistent with previous studies (Bendels
et al.
, 2018; Chary
et al.
, 2021; Wang
et al.
, 2021), which indicate
that gender inequality in authorship is particularly evident in highly competitive articles, those with the highest citation
counts, and is accentuated when women are rst authors.
ese conclusions also align with the results of this study, which conrm that in the most cited publications in journalism, men
predominantly occupy the rst and last authorship positions. is is signicant because authorship position is considered a
measure of research sta productivity, with the rst and last positions being the most relevant. e rst author is the most
visible, while the last author is generally assigned to the “senior” author or the group leader (Bendels
et al.
, 2018; Albarracín
et al.
, 2020).
Regarding gender-based collaboration dynamics, it is observed that researchers of the highest-impact journalism publications
follow dierent patterns depending on gender. is aligns with previous research (Broderick & Casadevall, 2019; Bosco
et al.
,
2024) indicating that women researchers tend to work more in mixed-gender teams, whereas men tend to collaborate primarily
with other men. ese dynamics occur in a context where, although women’s work receives more views, it is less cited and less
visible in academic networks due to their lower participation in collaborative structures (Rajkó
et al.
, 2023; Song
et al.
, 2023).
Additionally, some male authors exhibit higher than expected self-citation rates (Ghiasi
et al.
, 2018), and collaboration among
men tends to be preferential, generating closed citation networks (Broderick & Casadevall, 2019; Dinu, 2021).Regarding
the topics addressed in the most cited journalism publications, no signicant dierences were observed in research topic
selection based on the gender of authorship. Both men and women publish on economic and technological changes driven
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 49
by major digital giants and their impact on political communication. Topics include the inuence of algorithms (Diakopoulos,
2015; Bailo
et al.
, 2021; Reuning
et al.
, 2022), audience fragmentation and the emergence of new forms of audience interaction
(Fletcher & Nielsen, 2018), the impact of fake news on the political and media ecosystem (Waisbord, 2018), and the ongoing
transformation of the profession (Deuze & Witschge, 2018).
is may be related to the publication period, as 2018 is identied as the year with the most articles published in the
selected sample. is period is linked to two political and social events that signicantly impacted the communication eld:
Donald Trump’s rise to power and the 2016 Brexit referendum. Both events generated a large number of articles addressing
misinformation in political communication and electoral processes (Bennett & Livingston, 2018). Another notable event that
year was Facebook’s algorithm changes, prioritizing content shared by friends and family over that of media organizations.
is aected the inuence of the ‘platformization’ of journalism and highlighted the dependence of traditional media on these
platforms’ algorithms (Nieborg & Poell, 2018). Newsrooms had to adapt their content and distribution strategies, marking a
period when relying on social media for news dissemination became more complex and costly.
Finally, there is limited attention to gender and diversity inclusion, likely because these topics are not always considered
priorities compared to other areas of study. is situation, along with the lack of eective measures and existing bias against
research promoting equal opportunities among researchers, has created additional barriers to gender equity (Cislak
et al.
,
2018).
6. Conclusions
is research analyzed publication dynamics and collaboration patterns based on gender among authors in the most
inuential journalism articles published between 2013 and 2023. e results expand on previous studies of gender inequalities
in leading scientic publications within this eld. Additionally, after identifying the topics of the articles it explored whether
any relationship exists between the gender of authors and the selection of topics in each publication.
Next, we reect on the objectives set for this research to assess the degree to which they were met: Regarding Objective 1,
focused on authorship gender, the results indicate an imbalance in the authorship of the most cited journalism articles, with
60% of authors being men, representing 65% of all authorships. Concerning authorship positions, men occupy the rst author
position in 65.5% of publications –almost double that of women (35.5%). Although the dierence is smaller in intermediate
positions, it increases again in the last-author positions.
Regarding author collaboration dynamics, mixed-gender authorships, involving both men and women, predominate,
representing 56.7% of the sample. Exclusively male collaborations, with only men participating, constitute 36.2%, while
exclusively female collaborations account for only 7.1%. ese data indicate that men tend to collaborate primarily with other
men, whereas women participate more in mixed-gender teams.
Concerning Objective 2, which analyzes article topics, 2018 stands out as the year with the highest number of most-cited
articles. e discussion section has already addressed possible reasons for this surge in articles and citations, which not
only marked a turning point but have continued to serve as a crucial reference in journalism studies over time. No gender
50 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
dierences were observed in the topics addressed. Male and female researchers both investigate the impact of technological
and economic transformation on journalism and political communication, addressing phenomena such as the platform
economy, misinformation, computational journalism, and process automation. On the other hand, only three of the 200
analyzed publications included keywords related to gender analysis or diversity inclusion.
ese results align with previous ndings showing the lack of balanced representation of women in authorships in
communication and journalism, especially among the most cited authorships and publications. Furthermore, the gender gap
is greater when considering collaboration dynamics between men and women, with men collaborating more with other men,
while women tend to work in mixed-gender groups.
Additionally, there is a noticeable lack of publications focused on gender inclusion and diversity, in contrast to the prevalence
of studies centered on topics such as political power, misinformation, and the inuence of large technology companies.
Overall, the study highlights the importance of adopting new perspectives to address structural inequalities in journalism.
Some practices that are focused on the eld of journalism and communication could be applied to reduce the gender gap in
academic publications across any discipline:
Promote research in communication and journalism from a gender perspective, taking into account the historical inequality
in access to opportunities between men and women.
Collect and publish reliable, gender-disaggregated information on the participation of men, women, and people with diverse
gender identities in research teams, especially in the eld of journalism and communication studies. is data should be
publicly accessible, easy to visualize, and regularly updated.
Encourage the development of assessments and publications that address the situation of women and the persistence of the
gender gap in the eld of journalism and communication, based on research projects and groups.
Contribute to making the work of women researchers visible by including full names in bibliographic references; in particular,
international citation styles that display full names rather than initials should be promoted.
Promote parity in research teams, both in terms of gender and professional categories, through concrete measures
(scholarships, research projects, etc.), encouraging the participation of women and young people with diverse gender
identities in science, supporting women in leadership roles within teams and research projects, and fostering the creation of
networks and collaborative spaces among women researchers.
Encourage the inclusion of gender studies experts in research projects and groups, as well as on editorial boards, advisory
committees, and scientic committees of academic journals.
Eliminate any gender bias present in scientic materials and communications, as well as in management documents.
Promote the creation, where appropriate, and dissemination of protocols among research communities (universities and
research teams) that facilitate the use of inclusive language in reports and articles produced by the teams.
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 51
7. Limitations and Future Research
It is important to note that a binary gender system (male/female) was used, which does not consider gender self-identication
or the inclusion of non-binary categories which is a limitation of this research. is approach does not capture the existing
gender diversity, as it relies on statistical criteria to assign the gender of authors. Additionally, the margin of error associated
with such tools must be taken into account. In this study, a manual verication detected a 5.67% error rate, primarily
concentrated in the disambiguation of names of Asian origin.
Future research could explore the practices and perceptions of women authors to better understand the gaps observed in the
sample, as well as implement gender self-identication surveys for a more precise, non-binary, and inclusive categorization.
Additionally, the frequency of women’s publications in journals of dierent impact levels could be analyzed. It would also be
relevant to study the inuence of the authors’ country of aliation, publication costs, and open access on gendered authorship.
Furthermore, it would be useful to compare these results with random samples or less-cited publications to assess potential
dierences in gender authorship patterns.
8. Acknowledgements
is article has been translated into English by Michelle Seidel, to whom we are grateful for her work.
is work is part of the project “Parameters and Strategies to Increase the Relevance of Media and Digital Communication
in Society: Curation, Visualization, and Visibility (CUVICOM),” funded by MICIU/AEI/PID2021-123579OB-I00 and by
“FEDER/EU.”
9. Contributions
Name and surnam
e
Conception and design of the workAnna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez
Methodology
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Pere Freixa y Lluís Codina
Data collection and analysisAnna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Pere Freixa y Lluís Codina
Discussion and conclusionsAnna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez
Drafting, formatting, version review and approvalAnna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Pere Freixa y Lluís Codina
52 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
10. References
Ahmad, S. (2016). Family or future in the academy?
Review of Educational Research
,
87
(1)
,
204-239.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316631626
Albarracín, M. L. G., Castro, C. M., & Chaparro, P. E.(2020). Importancia, denición y conictos de la autoría en publicaciones
cientícas.
Revista Bioética
,
28
(1), 10-16.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020281361
Alcalde-González, V., & Belli, S. (2024). Gestión del conicto trabajo-cuidados en el ámbito cientíco-académico: un estudio
cualitativo sobre las experiencias de mujeres investigadoras en España.
Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas
,
(188),
3–20.
https://doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.188.3-20
Asamblea general de las Naciones Unidas. (2016). Día Internacional de la Mujer y la niña en la Ciencia (A/RES/70/212) del 17 de
febrero de 2016.
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/821065/les/A_RES_70_212-ES.pdf
Azizi, H., Abdellatif, W., Nasrullah, M., Ali, S., Ding, J., & Khosa, F. (2021). Leadership gender disparity in the fty highest ranking
north american universities: ematic analysis under a theoretical lens.
Postgraduate Medical Journal
,
98
(1163), 705-709.
https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-139615
Bailo, F., Meese, J., & Hurcombe, E. (2022). e institutional impacts of algorithmic distribution: Facebook and the australian
news media.
Social Media +
Society, 7
(2).
https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211024963
Bendels, M. H. K., Müller, R., Brueggmann, D., & Groneberg, D. A. (2018). Gender disparities in high-quality research revealed by
nature index journals.
PLoS ONE, 13
(1), e0189136.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189136
Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). e disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic
institutions.
European Journal of Communication, 33
(2), 122-139.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317
Bian, L., Leslie, S., & Cimpian, A. (2017). Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and inuence children’s
interests.
Science
,
355
(6323), 389-391.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah6524
Bosco, A., Verney, S., Bermúdez, S., & Tonarelli, A. (2024). Surviving in a male academia: gender gap, publication strategies and
career stage in south european political science journals.
European Political Science
,
23
(3), 297-320.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-023-00443-8
Broderick, N. A., & Casadevall, A. (2019). Gender inequalities among authors who contributed equally.
eLife, 8.
https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.36399
Bustelo, M., & Salido, O. (2024). Gender biases in the evaluation of knowledge transfer: A meta-evaluative analysis of the Spanish
“Knowledge transfer and innovation sexennium”.
Evaluation and Program Planning
,
104, 102432.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
evalprogplan.2024.102432.
Castonguay, S. (2023). Gender dierences in rewards for academic performance: the case of north american environmental
sociology.
Environmental Sociology, 10
(1), 30-41.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2023.2283824
Chan, H. F., & Torgler, B. (2020). Gender dierences in performance of top cited scientists by eld and country.
Scientometrics
,
125
(3), 2421-2447.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03733-w
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 53
Chary, S., Amrein, K., Soeteman, D. I., Mehta, S., & Christopher, K. B. (2021). Gender disparity in critical care publications: a novel
female rst author index.
Annals of Intensive Care
,
11
(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-021-00889-3
Cislak, A., Formanowicz, M., & Saguy, T. (2018). Bias against research on gender bias.
Scientometrics
,
115
(1), 189-200.
https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11192-018-2667-0
Cook, R. J., & Cusack, S. (2010).
Gender Stereotyping: Transnational Legal Perspectives
. University of Pennsylvania Press.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fhmhd
Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S., & Vanneman, R. (2001). e glass ceiling eect.
Social Forces
,
80
(2)
,
655-681.
https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0091
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine,
feminist theory and antiracist politics.
University of Chicago Legal Forum
, 1989(1), 139–167.
https://chicagounbound.uchicago.
edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8
Dahlvig, J., Kulick, N. D., & Greenhalgh, A. (2024). Revisiting “Glass Ceilings and Sticky Floors”: A commentary on navigating
gender in higher education
. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21
(07)
.
https://doi.org/10.53761/z5z3pk86
De Filippo, D., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2018). Bibliometric and altmetric analysis of three Social science disciplines.
Frontiers In
Research Metrics And Analytics, 3(
34).
https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2018.00034
Demeter, M., & Toth, T. (2020). e world-systemic network of global elite sociology: the western male monoculture at faculties
of the top one-hundred sociology departments of the world.
Scientometrics
,
124
(3), 2469-2495.
https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-020-03563-w
Deuze, M., & Witschge, T. (2018). Beyond journalism: eorizing the transformation of journalism.
Journalism
,
19
(2), 165–181.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916688550
Diakopoulos, N. (2015). Algorithmic accountability.
Digital Journalism
,
3
(3), 398-415.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.9
76411
Dinu, N. (2021). ¿Citan las mujeres investigadoras más a las otras mujeres que a los hombres?
Telos Revista de Estudios
Interdisciplinarios en Ciencias Sociales, 23
(3), 568-583.
https://doi.org/10.36390/telos233.05
Dorta-González, P., & Gómez-Déniz, E. (2022). Modeling the obsolescence of research literature in disciplinary journals through
the age of their cited references. Scientometrics,
127
(6), 2901-2931.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04359-w
Esparcia, A. C., Moraga, Á. R., & Martínez, A. A. (2012). La investigación en comunicación. Análisis bibliométrico de las revistas
de mayor impacto del ISI.
Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 67
, 248-270.
https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-067-955-248-270
European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2021).
Horizon Europe guidance on gender equality
plans
. Publications Oce of the European Union.
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/876509.
European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2021).
She gures handbook 2021
. Publications Oce.
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/003736
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
54 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2019). She gures 2018. Publications Oce.
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/936
European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2016).
She gures 2015
. Publications Oce.
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/744106
European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2013).
She gures 2012: gender in research and
innovation: statistics and indicators
. Publications Oce.
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/38520
Fauzi, M. A., Tan, C. N., Tamyez, P. F. M., Aziz, N. A. A., & Wider, W. (2024). Women leadership in higher education: past, present
and future trends.
Asian Education and Development Studies
,
13
(2), 117-133.
https://doi.org/10.1108/aeds-11-2023-0168
Feeley, T. H., & Yang, Z. (2022). Is there a Matilda eect in communication journals?
Communication Reports
,
35
(1), 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2021.1974505
Frandsen, T. F., Jacobsen, R. H., & Ousager, J. (2020). Gender gaps in scientic performance: a longitudinal matching study of
health sciences researchers.
Scientometrics
,
124
(2), 1511-1527.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03528-z
Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis.
New Media
& Society
,
20
(7), 2450-2468.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170
Freelon, D., Pruden, M. L., Eddy, K. A., & Kuo, R. (2023). Inequities of race, place, and gender among the communication citation
elite, 2000–2019.
Journal of Communication
,
73
(4), 356-367.
https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqad002
Foss, N. J., & Olsen, A. Ø. (2023). Understanding the role of gender and project characteristics in research funding evaluations.
European Management Review
,
21
(2), 277-295.
https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12589
Friedmann, E. (2018). Increasing women’s participation in the STEM industry.
Journal of Social Marketing, 8
(4
),
442-460.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jsocm-12-2017-0086
Gallardo, M. (2020). Does maternity aect women’s careers? Perceptions of working mothers in academia.
Educación XX1
,
24
(1).
https://doi.org/10.5944/educXX1.26714
García-González J, Forcén P, Jimenez-Sanchez M.(2019).Men and women dier in their perception of gender bias in research
institutions.
PLoS ONE 14
(12), e0225763.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225763
García-Ramos, F., Zurian, F., & Núñez-Gómez, P. (2020). Gender studies in communication degrees.
Comunicar, 28
(63), 21-30.
https://doi.org/10.3916/c63-2020-02
Ghiasi, G., Mongeon, P., Sugimoto, C., & Larivière, V. (2018). Gender homophily in citations.
STI 2018 Conference Proceedings
,
1519-1525.
https://hdl.handle.net/1887/64521
Goyanes, M., Tóth, T., & Háló, G. (2024). Gender dierences in google scholar representation and impact: an empirical analysis
of political communication, journalism, health communication, and media psychology.
Scientometrics, 129(3)
, 1719-1737.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04945-0
Hagemann, S. (2022). Why does gender inequality in academic publishing persist? Lessons and recommendations.
European
Union Politics
,
23
(4), 729 740.
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 55
https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221120773
Hernández-González, V., Carné-Torrent, J. M., Jové-Deltell, C., Pano-Rodríguez, Á., & Reverter-Masia, J. (2022). e Top 100
most cited scientic papers in the public, environmental & occupational health category of Web of Science: A bibliometric and
visualized analysis.
International Journal Of Environmental Research And Public Health,
19
(15), 9645.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph19159645
James, A., Buelow, F., Gibson, L., & Brower, A. (2024). Female-dominated disciplines have lower evaluated research quality and
funding success rates, for men and women.
ELife, 13, RP97613
.
https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.97613.3
Johansson, J., Gao, G., Sölvell, I., & Wigren‐Kristoferson, C. (2024). Exploring caring collaborations in academia through feminist
reexive dialogues.
Gender Work and Organization
31
(5), 2241-2263.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.13115
Jones, K., & Floyd, A. (2023). Women academics experiences of maternity leave in the neoliberal university: Unmasking
governmentality.
Gender Work and Organization, 31
(1), 92-114.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.13059
Joshi, A. (2014). By Whom and when is women’s expertise recognized? e Interactive eects of gender and education in science
and engineering teams.
Administrative Science Quarterly
,
59
(2), 202-239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839214528331
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Glynn, C. J., & Huge, M. (2013). e Matilda eect in science communication.
Science Communication
,
35
(5), 603-625.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012472684
Lincoln, A. E., Pincus, S., Koster, J. B., & Leboy, P. S. (2012). e Matilda eect in science: Awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and
2000s.
Social Studies of Science
,
42
(2), 307-320.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711435830
Lindqvist, A., Sendén, M. G., & Renström, E. A. (2020). What is gender, anyway: a review of the options for operationalising gender.
Psychology & Sexuality
,
12
(4), 332–344.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2020.1729844
Lombardo, E., Naldini, M., & Poggio, B. (2024). Gender inequalities in academia: Multiple approaches to closing the gap.
Sociologia del Lavoro
,
168
, 9-27.
https://doi.org/10.3280/sl2024-168001
Magliozzi, D., Saperstein, A., & Westbrook, L. (2016). Scaling up: Representing gender diversity in survey research.
Socius
,
2
,
2378023116664352.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023116664352
Mavrovounis, G., Makris, M., & Demetriades, A. K. (2023). Traumatic spinal cord and spinal column injuries: A bibliometric
analysis of the 200 most cited articles. Journal Of Craniovertebral Junction And Spine,
14
(4), 346-364.
https://doi.org/10.4103/
jcvjs.jcvjs_97_23
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). e journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis.
Scientometrics
,
106
(1), 213-228.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
Naciones Unidas. (1995). Declaración de Beijing. Informe de la Cuarta Conferencia Mundial sobre la Mujer. 1995.
https://goo.
su/CdeN8
Namsor | Name checker for Gender, Origin and Ethnicity determination. (2024). Accessed: 10th Jan 2024: https://namsor.app/
Nieborg, D. B., & Poell, T. (2018). e platformization of cultural production: eorizing the contingent cultural commodity. New
Media & Society,
20
(11), 4275-4292.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818769694
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
56 |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
|
July-December of 2026
Authorship and Collaboration Guidelines in Journalism Research: A Gender Analysis of the Most Cited Publications
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
doxa.comunicación
Nyul, B., Ksenofontov, I., Fleischmann, A., & Kahalon, R. (2024). Brilliance as gender deviance: Gender-role incongruity as another
barrier to women’s success in academic elds.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
,
116
, 104680.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jesp.2024.104680
Pranckut
ė
, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: e titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world.
Publications
,
9
(1), 12.
https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
Pecis, L., & Touboulic, A. (2024). Academic mothers and the practice of embodied care: navigating and resisting
uncaring structures in the neoliberal academy.
Equality Diversity and Inclusion an International Journal
,
43(5)
, 784-803.
https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-07-2022-0194
Pottho, M., & Zimmermann, F. (2017). Is there a gender-based fragmentation of communication science? An investigation
of the reasons for the apparent gender homophily in citations.
Scientometrics, 112
(2), 1047-1063.
https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-017-2392-0
Rajkó, A., Herendy, C., Goyanes, M., & Demeter, M. (2025). e Matilda Eect in Communication Research: e
Eects of Gender and Geography on Usage and Citations Across 11 Countries.
Communication Research, 0
(0).
https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502221124389
Reuning, K., Whitesell, A., & Hannah, A. L. (2022). Facebook algorithm changes may have amplied local republican parties.
Research & Politics
,
9
(2).
https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680221103809
Rodríguez-Baiget, M. J., Machado, A. M., Del Rosal, J. C. C., & Vergara-Romero, A. (2024). e scarce representation of
women university professors in research groups.
International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education 13
(3), 1384.
https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i3.27291
Rossiter, M. W. (1993). e Matthew Matilda eect in science.
Social Studies of Science
, 23(2), 325-341.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030631293023002004
Santamaría, L., & Mihaljev
ić
, H. (2018). Comparison and benchmark of name-to-gender inference services.
PeerJ Computer
Science, 4, e156
.
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.156
Sebo, P. (2021). Performance of gender detection tools: a comparative study of name-to-gender inference services.
Journal of the
Medical Library Association, 109
(3)
.
https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.1185
Segovia-Saiz, C., Briones-Vozmediano, E., Pastells-Peiró, R., González-María, E., & Gea-Sánchez, M. (2020). Techo de cristal y
desigualdades de género en la carrera profesional de las mujeres académicas e investigadoras en ciencias biomédicas.
Gaceta
Sanitaria, 34(4)
, 403-410.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2018.10.008
Song, Y., Wang, X., & Li, G. (2024). Can social media combat gender inequalities in academia? Measuring the prevalence of the
Matilda eect in communication.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
,
29
(1).
https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmad050
elwall, M., Kousha, K., Stuart, E., Makita, M., Abdoli, M., Wilson, P., & Levitt, J. (2023). In which elds are citations indicators of
research quality?
Journal Of e Association For Information Science And Technology
,
74
(8), 941-953.
https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24767
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
doxa.comunicación |
nº 43, pp. 35-57
July-December of 2026
Anna Ventura-Cisquella, Mari Vállez, Lluís Codina and Pere Freixa
ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978
| 57
UNESCO Institute for Statistics..2021.
One in three researchers is a woman
. UNESCO. (Datos de 107 países, 2015–2018). Última
actualización 20 de abril de 2023.
Waisbord, S. (2018). Truth is what happens to news.
Journalism Studies
,
19
(13), 1866-1878.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1492881
Wang, X., Dworkin, J. D., Zhou, D., Stiso, J., Falk, E. B., Bassett, D. S., Zurn, P., & Lydon-Staley, D. M. (2021). Gendered citation
practices in the eld of communication. Annals Of e International Communication Association, 45(2), 134-153.
https://doi.or
g/10.1080/23808985.2021.1960180
Westbrook, L., & Saperstein, A. (2015). New categories are not enough: Rethinking the measurement of sex and gender in social
surveys.
Gender & Society
,
29
(4), 534-560.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243215584758
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>
<p>[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]</p>