Sousan Homaeipour

• We examine the systematic underrecognition of female scientists (Matilda effect) by exploring the citation network of papers published in the American Physical Society (APS) journals. Our analysis shows that articles written by men (first author, last author and dominant gender of authors) receive more citations than similar articles written by women (first author, last author and dominant gender of authors) after controlling for the journal of publication, year of publication and content of the publication. Statistical significance of the overlap between the lists of references was considered as the measure of similarity between articles in our analysis. In addition, we found that men are less likely to cite articles written by women and women are less likely to cite articles written by men. This pattern leads to receiving more citations by articles written by men than similar articles written by women because the majority of authors who published in APS journals are male (85%). We also observed Matilda effect reduces when articles are published in journals with the highest impact factors. In other words, people’s evaluation of articles published in these journals is not affected by the gender of authors significantly. Finally, we suggested a method that can be applied by editors in academic journals to reduce the evaluation bias to some extent. Editors can identify missing citations using our proposed method to complete bibliographies. This policy can reduce the evaluation bias because we observed papers written by female scholars (first author, last author, the dominant gender of authors) miss more citations than articles written by male scholars (first author, last author, the dominant gender of authors).