Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
8
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
8 results for “gender inequality”
Survey data on the perceptions and impacts of gender inequality in the geosciences
<p>The data stem from an anonymous, online survey conducted from March 25 to April 11, 2018 using Google Surveys. The link to the survey was distributed by the authors via emails and social media (Twitter and Facebook). Among the 1415 participants, we analyzed the responses of those who identified as either female or male (leaving out seven non-binary respondents due to the small sample size), and currently work in academia (i.e., universities or research institutes, including emeritus and adjunct professors, research support staff, and research assistants). We thereby retained 1220 respondents with a gender distribution of 67.0% female to 33.0% male survey participants.</p> <p>Based on this survey, we published to following freely accessible article: Popp, A. L.; Lutz, S. R.; Khatami, S.; van Emmerik, T. H. M.; Knoben, W. J. M. (2019) A global survey on the perceptions and impacts of gender inequality in the earth and space sciences, <em>Earth and Space Science</em>, 6(8), 1460-1468, <a href="http://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA000706">doi:10.1029/2019EA000706</a>.</p>
Gender inequalities on editorial boards of indexed pediatrics journals
<p>These raw data belong to the study “Gender inequalities on editorial boards of indexed pediatrics journals”. </p> <p>The presence of women in decision-making positions, such as on editorial committees of biomedical journals, is not the same as that of men. This paper analyzes the gender composition of editorial committees (EBMs) and editor-in-chief (ECs) positions of pediatric journals. The gender of EBMs and ECs of 125 journals classified in the pediatrics area of the Journal Citation Report (JCR) were analyzed. The following indicators were calculated: gender distribution of ECs and EBMs by journal, publisher, subject speciality, country, quartile of the journal in JCR and country of affiliation of the members. The total number of EBMs was 4,242. The distribution by sex of the ECs was 19.44% women and 80.56% men, while the EBMs were 33.05% women and 66.95% men. Twenty journals exhibited a greater representation of women than men, and in four there was parity. Journals with greater participation of women specialized in nursing, physical therapy and were related to nutrition (lactation and breastfeeding). Only one-fifth of ECs and one-third of EBMs are female. Women's participation is higher in journals related to nursing, physical and occupational therapy, and nutrition. The United States has the highest number of EBMs, followed by the European Union. </p> <p>This file contains the following variables: Rank, Full Journal Title,Editorial Board Members (EBM), First Name, Gender, Country, Country Code, Geographical Area, Editor-in-Chief (EC), Country Editor-in-Chief, Gender Editor-in-Chief, Url Journals.</p>
Psycholinguistic features of verbal representation of the concept of "gender inequality" by student youth
<p><strong><em>Goal. </em></strong><em>To present the results of a psycholinguistic experiment devoted to the study of verbal representations of the concept of "gender inequality" in the linguistic consciousness of young people.</em></p> <p><strong><em>Methods: </em></strong><em>a</em><strong><em> </em></strong><em>systematic analysis and generalization of literature on gender aspects of psycholinguistic research. Directed associative experiment (DAE) with the word-stimulus "gender inequality"; method of cognitive interpretation; questionnaire: to clarify the characteristics of the sample, comparative-descriptive and mathematical-statistical methods.</em></p> <p><strong><em>Results. </em></strong><em>The concept of "gender inequality" in the linguistic consciousness of student youth is represented by such frequent associations as: humiliate (6.8%), fight (4.5%), suppress (3.7%), insult (2.6%) and limit (2.3%). Differences in the most frequent reactions of women and men were revealed: women - to humiliate 42 (7.9%), to fight 32 (6%), to suppress 19 (3.6%), to limit 16 (3%), to insult 15 (2.8%) ), respect 11 (2.1%), solve 11 (2.1%); men: humiliate 11 (4.5%), oppress 10 (4.1%), insult 5 (2%), defend 5 (2%). </em></p>
Supplementary Material for Men's Perceptions of Gender Inequality in Software Engineering
<p><strong>README</strong></p> <p>This repository contains supplementary materials for the paper titled "<em>Do you see what happens around you? Men's Perceptions of Gender Inequality in Software Engineering".</em></p> <p>The data in this repository originates from a survey conducted with men technology practitioners, focusing on their experiences within the industry and their perceptions of gender inequality within their teams and workplaces.</p> <p>The survey was administered using Microsoft Forms, allowing practitioners to respond to the questionnaire asynchronously, anonymously, and without supervision.</p> <p>The organization of this repository is as follows:</p> <ol> <li><em><code>charts.Rmd</code>:</em> This file contains R scripts used to generate the figures that present quantitative data in the manuscript.</li> <li><em><code>Q<strong>x</strong>.png</code></em>: These images are the figures generated by the <code>charts.Rmd</code> script.</li> <li><em><code>responses.csv</code></em>: This file contains complete and detailed responses to the questionnaire submitted by participants.</li> <li><em><code>responses_coding.xlsx</code></em>: Within this sheet, you will find the results of the coding process conducted using the Grounded Theory methodology.</li> <li><em><code>survey_questions_english.pdf</code></em>: This document contains a faithful translation of the questionnaire sent to the participants.</li> </ol> <p> </p>
Supplementary Material for "Do you think there is no gender inequality in Software Engineering?"
<p><strong>README</strong></p> <p>This repository contains supplementary materials for the paper titled "<em>Do you see what happens around you? Men's Perceptions of Gender Inequality in Software Engineering".</em></p> <p>The data in this repository originates from a survey conducted with men technology practitioners, focusing on their experiences within the industry and their perceptions of gender inequality within their teams and workplaces.</p> <p>The survey was administered using Microsoft Forms, allowing practitioners to respond to the questionnaire asynchronously, anonymously, and without supervision.</p> <p>The organization of this repository is as follows:</p> <ol> <li><code>Phase 1:</code> <ol> <li><em><code>charts.Rmd</code>:</em> This file contains R scripts used to generate the figures that present quantitative data in the manuscript.</li> <li><em><code>Q<strong>x</strong>.png</code></em>: These images are the figures generated by the <code>charts.Rmd</code> script.</li> <li><em><code>responses.csv</code></em>: This file contains complete and detailed responses to the questionnaire submitted by participants.</li> <li><em><code>responses_coding.xlsx</code></em>: Within this sheet, you will find the results of the coding process conducted using the Grounded Theory methodology.</li> <li><em><code>survey_questions_english.pdf</code></em>: This document contains a faithful translation of the questionnaire sent to the participants.</li> </ol> </li> <li>Phase 2 <ol> <li><em>brazilian_responses.csv: </em>focus group responses from brazilian participants.</li> <li><em>european_responses.csv:</em> focus group responses from european participants.</li> </ol> </li> </ol> <p> </p>
Understanding the Role of Gender Inequality and Food Insecurity on Maternal and Child Health
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04383847. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
FEATURES OF UKRAINIAN STUDENTS` VERBAL REPRESENTATION OF THE GENDER INEQUALITY`S CONCEPT
<p>The study aimed to determine Ukrainian students' verbal representation of the gender inequality's concept. Verbal representations were obtained based on the use of a directed associative experiment. The study involved 309 students (199 females and 110 males) from 17 to 25 years. Gender analysis showed: women provided 539 reactions, including 530 verbal (176 originals) reactions and nine rejections; men provided 319 reactions: 310 verbal reactions (103 original) and nine rejections. The most frequent reactions to the stimulus “gender inequality" were revealed: жінка / woman (10,6%), чоловік / man (9,4%), фемінізм / feminism (4,3%), несправедливість / injustice (3,7%), права / rights (2,9%), нерівність / inequality (2,8%), стать / gender (2,7%), сексизм / sexism (2,4%), дискримінація / discrimination (2,3%), насильство / violence (2%). It was determined that the concept of "gender inequality" has a negative connotation among Ukrainian students. Cognitive interpretation of the data showed that the concept has a more negative emotional connotation for women than for men. For a significant number of women, gender inequality includes experiences associated with sexism, discrimination, and violence. Analysis of male associations has shown that men's concept has a less emotional response and is presented at a more abstract (theoretical) level.</p>
Reflecting aspects of gender inequality in the brazilian software development sector
<p><strong>Overview</strong><br>Welcome to the repository for the paper "Reflecting aspects of gender inequality in the brazilian software development sector"! This repository contains the Supplementary Material, which includes a spreadsheet with the general data collected in the research, a descriptive report of the results obtained, and the set of questions addressed in the questionnaire used in the survey. The raw data presented in Section 5 of the paper are also accessible. The content here is intended to support the research and facilitate further exploration and replication of the study.</p> <p><strong>Repository Organization</strong><br>The repository is organized as follows: Includes supplementary materials such as additional data and documents referenced in the paper.</p> <p><strong>File Formats:</strong> .csv and .xlsx, .pdf<br>Software Requirements: Spreadsheet editor that supports .csv and .xlsx files.</p> <p><strong>License</strong><br>This repository is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. You are free to use, share, and adapt the materials as long as appropriate credit is given.</p> <p> </p> <p><span dir="auto"><span dir="auto">This paper has not yet been published.</span></span></p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.