Women Enter Too, but Men Persist: The Temporal Structure of Gender Inequality in the Global Citation Elite

Jul 16, 2026

Upload by Asher

Gender inequality in science is analyzed through the dynamics of the global citation elite rather than static snapshots. Annual top 2% Stanford/Elsevier citation lists for 2019–2024 and a database of 1,221,363 person-year observations across 465,707 unique scholars from 150+ countries are used to study entry, exit, and durable core membership. Women’s share rises from 18.39% (2019) to 20.98% (2024) but declines with longer persistence, falling to 17.84% among those appearing in all six lists. Logistic regression indicates lower odds of durable-core membership for women (OR=0.69), and women are less represented in the all-career elite (15.87% vs. 20.98%).

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages34

Reading Time1 h 26 min

Abstract

Introduction

Prior research on gender disparities in science

Temporal approach and gendered permeability of the citation elite

1 Women Enter Too, but Men Persist: The Temporal Structure of Gender Inequality in the Global Citation Elite Marek Kwiek Center for Public Policy Studies, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland [kwiekm@amu.edu.pl](kwiekm@amu.edu.pl), ORCID: [orcid.org/0000-0001-7953-1063](orcid.org/0000-0001-7953-1063) Abstract In this research, I analyze the gender dynamics ofthe global citation elite using annual top 2% Stanford/Elsevier lists for 2019–2024. My database includes 1.22 million person-year observations (N=1,221,363), which corresponds to 465,707 unique scientists and scholars from more than 150 countries. I move away from static representations of women in the citation elite toward analyses of entry, exit, and permanent membership in the durable core of this elite. The share of women in the annual citation elite increased from 18.39% in 2019 to 20.98% in 2024. However, women are more strongly represented among first-observed entrants than among continuing members, and their share decreases with the persistence of their presence among the citation elite expressed in years: from 22.19% among single-year members to 17.84% among scientists and scholars present in all six annual lists. Women are generally located closer to the lower boundary of the elite in terms of the citation index deciles – and men are closer to top deciles. My logistic regression models estimate a lower probability of women’s membership in the durable core of the citation elite (odds ratio estimate OR=0.69) . Women are also more weakly represented in the all-career elite than in the annual elite (15.87% vs. 20.98%). I draw conclusions about gender dynamics within the global citation elite and gender inequalities in science more generally. Keywords: gender inequality in science; global citation elite; highly cited researchers; citation impact; women in science; academic careers; cumulative advantage; bibliometric data 1. Introduction Previous research on gender disparities in science has repeatedly shown that women are underrepresented in the most visible, prestigious, and rewarded segments of academic science. This underrepresentation has been shown across disciplines, countries, career stages, authorship positions, citation impact, research financing, academic rewards and distinctions, and access to elite networks (Huang et al., 2020; Larivière et al., 2013; Meho, 2021; Ross et al., 2022; SánchezJiménez et al., 2024). My research interest is not whether women are less present among the most visible scientists and scholars in the world. In this study, I focus on what positions men and women take after they have actually entered the citation elite. My interest is whether men and women enter the citation elite with similar intensity, whether they stay in that elite for a comparable period, and whether they become part of the durable core of the elite to a similar degree. The most highly cited scientists and scholars constitute a highly selective segment of the global science system. Their position reflects their individual productivity, citation impact, and citationbased accumulated advantage. This advantage comes from institutional assets, collaboration networks, and prolonged visibility (Aksnes et al., 2019; Ioannidis et al., 2016, 2019, 2020; Merton, 1968, 1988). Research has shown that women are underrepresented among highly cited scientists. 2 Ioannidis and colleagues made an important contribution to studying “women in science” by comparing the representation of women in the full population of Scopus authors and among highly cited researchers (top 2%) and demonstrating that gender gaps are much more intensive at the top of the citation hierarchy than in a wider population of authors (Ioannidis et al., 2023) . A similar conclusion can be derived from other analyses of highly cited researchers, in which the share of women in this segment is increasing more slowly than the share of women in the wider population of scientists. In add

FAQs

What data and period are used to study the global citation elite’s gender dynamics?

The study uses annual top 2% Stanford/Elsevier citation lists covering 2019–2024, plus a career-long citation elite list for 2024. The database contains 1,221,363 person-year observations from 465,707 unique scientists across 150+ countries.

How does women’s representation change from 2019 to 2024, and what happens with persistence?

Women’s share in the annual citation elite increases from 18.39% in 2019 to 20.98% in 2024. However, women’s share decreases as presence persists: from 22.19% among single-year members to 17.84% among those present in all six annual lists.

What do the regression results suggest about women’s chances of joining the durable core?

Logistic regression estimates a lower probability of women’s membership in the durable core of the citation elite, with an odds ratio OR=0.69.

Jul 16, 2026

Upload by Asher