↓ Skip to main content

PNAS

Article Metrics

Gender stereotypes can explain the gender-equality paradox

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, November 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
188 tweeters
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages
reddit
5 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
199 Mendeley
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

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 188 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 199 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 12%
Student > Bachelor 19 10%
Researcher 16 8%
Student > Master 16 8%
Lecturer 8 4%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 82 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 31 16%
Psychology 27 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Arts and Humanities 5 3%
Other 33 17%
Unknown 87 44%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 187. 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 19 September 2022.
All research outputs
#165,869
of 22,098,729 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#3,425
of 97,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,211
of 502,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#126
of 1,089 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,098,729 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 97,087 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 502,387 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,089 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.