mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Gender Gap in Natural Language Processing Research: Disparities in Authorship and Citations

arXiv 2005.00962 ↗First posted 3 May 2020cs.DL cs.CLcited by 17

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Disparities in authorship and citations across gender can have substantial adverse consequences not just on the disadvantaged genders, but also on the field of study as a whole. Measuring gender gaps is a crucial step towards addressing them. In this work, we examine female first author percentages and the citations to their papers in Natural Language Processing (1965 to 2019). We determine aggregate-level statistics using an existing manually curated author--gender list as well as first names strongly associated with a gender. We find that only about 29% of first authors are female and only about 25% of last authors are female. Notably, this percentage has not improved since the mid 2000s. We also show that, on average, female first authors are cited less than male first authors, even when controlling for experience and area of research. Finally, we discuss the ethical considerations involved in automatic demographic analysis.

Key facts. Cited by 17 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 3 May 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 3; 2023: 6; 2024: 3; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

17 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2023It's MBR All the Way Down: Modern Generation Techniques Through the Lens of Minimum Bayes Riskcited by 49
  2. 2022What Do NLP Researchers Believe? Results of the NLP Community Metasurveycited by 28
  3. 2023The Elephant in the Room: Analyzing the Presence of Big Tech in Natural Language Processing Researchcited by 27
  4. 2024Stop! In the Name of Flaws: Disentangling Personal Names and Sociodemographic Attributes in NLPcited by 22
  5. 2023We are Who We Cite: Bridges of Influence Between Natural Language Processing and Other Academic Fieldscited by 20
  6. 2022Geographic Citation Gaps in NLP Researchcited by 19
  7. 2023Forgotten Knowledge: Examining the Citational Amnesia in NLPcited by 13
  8. 2022D3: A Massive Dataset of Scholarly Metadata for Analyzing the State of Computer Science Researchcited by 11
  9. 2024Citation Amnesia: On The Recency Bias of NLP and Other Academic Fieldscited by 5
  10. 2021Determining the Credibility of Science Communicationcited by 4
  11. 2023Voices of Her: Analyzing Gender Differences in the AI Publication Worldcited by 3
  12. 2023Biases in Scholarly Recommender Systems: Impact, Prevalence, and Mitigationcited by 2
5 more
  1. 2024Is there really a Citation Age Bias in NLP?cited by 1
  2. 2026What happens when reviewers receive AI feedback in their reviews?cited by 1
  3. 2025Big Tech-Funded AI Papers Have Higher Citation Impact, Greater Insularity, and Larger Recency Biascited by 0
  4. 2026NLP needs Diversity outside of 'Diversity'cited by 0
  5. 2026Gender Differences in Research Topic and Method Selection in Library and Information Science: Perspectives from Three Top Journalscited by 0