| Title |
Gender stereotypes can explain the gender-equality paradox
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, November 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1073/pnas.2008704117 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Breda, Elyès Jouini, Clotilde Napp, Georgia Thebault |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 223 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 26 | 12% |
| Spain | 16 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 4% |
| France | 9 | 4% |
| Germany | 8 | 4% |
| Canada | 6 | 3% |
| Mexico | 5 | 2% |
| Japan | 5 | 2% |
| Denmark | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 24 | 11% |
| Unknown | 111 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 170 | 76% |
| Scientists | 45 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 2% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 333 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 333 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 8% |
| Researcher | 24 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 11 | 3% |
| Other | 49 | 15% |
| Unknown | 164 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 50 | 15% |
| Psychology | 38 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 10 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 47 | 14% |
| Unknown | 172 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 244. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2024.
All research outputs
#156,458
of 25,789,020 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#3,095
of 103,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,450
of 528,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#75
of 1,020 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,789,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103,754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 528,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,020 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.