Gender,Structural Holes,and Citations: The Effects of Women’s Increasing Proportional Representation in a Field

Large, sparsely connected social networks (i.e., networks rich in “structural holes”) are advantageous because they provide an informational edge. However, some studies have found that hole-rich networks can be a disadvantage for women. We examine the question: Are the returns women derive from structural holes contingent on women’s changing proportional representation in a field? Focusing on the context of knowledge production, with citations as a key metric of success, we analyzed co-authorship and citation data from elite management journals (1970–2006) using panel-data regression. Our findings reveal that the number of structural holes in women’s collaboration networks positively correlates with citations until women’s proportion in the field reaches approximately 30%. Beyond this tipping point, the relationship becomes negative and significant. This result remains robust after controlling for variables such as previous citations (both the individual’s and co-authors’), career stage, authorship order, gender homophily, and institutional status. Our study suggests that understanding the interplay between gender, structural holes, and citations requires a contextual perspective that considers the evolving circumstances women face as their representation in a field grows.