research paper that already published

Reference management. Clean and simple.

The top list of academic search engines

1. Google Scholar

4. science.gov, 5. semantic scholar, 6. baidu scholar, get the most out of academic search engines, frequently asked questions about academic search engines, related articles.

Academic search engines have become the number one resource to turn to in order to find research papers and other scholarly sources. While classic academic databases like Web of Science and Scopus are locked behind paywalls, Google Scholar and others can be accessed free of charge. In order to help you get your research done fast, we have compiled the top list of free academic search engines.

Google Scholar is the clear number one when it comes to academic search engines. It's the power of Google searches applied to research papers and patents. It not only lets you find research papers for all academic disciplines for free but also often provides links to full-text PDF files.

• Coverage: approx. 200 million articles
• Abstracts: only a snippet of the abstract is available
• Related articles: ✔
• References: ✔
• Cited by: ✔
• Links to full text: ✔
• Export formats: APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, Vancouver, RIS, BibTeX

BASE is hosted at Bielefeld University in Germany. That is also where its name stems from (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine).

• Coverage: approx. 136 million articles (contains duplicates)
• Abstracts: ✔
• Related articles: ✘
• References: ✘
• Cited by: ✘
• Export formats: RIS, BibTeX

CORE is an academic search engine dedicated to open-access research papers. For each search result, a link to the full-text PDF or full-text web page is provided.

• Coverage: approx. 136 million articles
• Links to full text: ✔ (all articles in CORE are open access)
• Export formats: BibTeX

Science.gov is a fantastic resource as it bundles and offers free access to search results from more than 15 U.S. federal agencies. There is no need anymore to query all those resources separately!

• Coverage: approx. 200 million articles and reports
• Links to full text: ✔ (available for some databases)
• Export formats: APA, MLA, RIS, BibTeX (available for some databases)

Semantic Scholar is the new kid on the block. Its mission is to provide more relevant and impactful search results using AI-powered algorithms that find hidden connections and links between research topics.

• Coverage: approx. 40 million articles
• Export formats: APA, MLA, Chicago, BibTeX

Although Baidu Scholar's interface is in Chinese, its index contains research papers in English as well as Chinese.

• Coverage: no detailed statistics available, approx. 100 million articles
• Abstracts: only snippets of the abstract are available
• Export formats: APA, MLA, RIS, BibTeX

RefSeek searches more than one billion documents from academic and organizational websites. Its clean interface makes it especially easy to use for students and new researchers.

• Coverage: no detailed statistics available, approx. 1 billion documents
• Abstracts: only snippets of the article are available
• Export formats: not available

Consider using a reference manager like Paperpile to save, organize, and cite your references. Paperpile integrates with Google Scholar and many popular databases, so you can save references and PDFs directly to your library using the Paperpile buttons:

Google Scholar is an academic search engine, and it is the clear number one when it comes to academic search engines. It's the power of Google searches applied to research papers and patents. It not only let's you find research papers for all academic disciplines for free, but also often provides links to full text PDF file.

Semantic Scholar is a free, AI-powered research tool for scientific literature developed at the Allen Institute for AI. Sematic Scholar was publicly released in 2015 and uses advances in natural language processing to provide summaries for scholarly papers.

BASE , as its name suggest is an academic search engine. It is hosted at Bielefeld University in Germany and that's where it name stems from (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine).

CORE is an academic search engine dedicated to open access research papers. For each search result a link to the full text PDF or full text web page is provided.

Science.gov is a fantastic resource as it bundles and offers free access to search results from more than 15 U.S. federal agencies. There is no need any more to query all those resources separately!

• Corrections

Search Help

Get the most out of Google Scholar with some helpful tips on searches, email alerts, citation export, and more.

Finding recent papers

Your search results are normally sorted by relevance, not by date. To find newer articles, try the following options in the left sidebar:

• click "Since Year" to show only recently published papers, sorted by relevance;
• click "Sort by date" to show just the new additions, sorted by date;
• click the envelope icon to have new results periodically delivered by email.

Locating the full text of an article

Abstracts are freely available for most of the articles. Alas, reading the entire article may require a subscription. Here're a few things to try:

• click a library link, e.g., "FindIt@Harvard", to the right of the search result;
• click a link labeled [PDF] to the right of the search result;
• click "All versions" under the search result and check out the alternative sources;
• click "Related articles" or "Cited by" under the search result to explore similar articles.

If you're affiliated with a university, but don't see links such as "FindIt@Harvard", please check with your local library about the best way to access their online subscriptions. You may need to do search from a computer on campus, or to configure your browser to use a library proxy.

Getting better answers

If you're new to the subject, it may be helpful to pick up the terminology from secondary sources. E.g., a Wikipedia article for "overweight" might suggest a Scholar search for "pediatric hyperalimentation".

If the search results are too specific for your needs, check out what they're citing in their "References" sections. Referenced works are often more general in nature.

Similarly, if the search results are too basic for you, click "Cited by" to see newer papers that referenced them. These newer papers will often be more specific.

Explore! There's rarely a single answer to a research question. Click "Related articles" or "Cited by" to see closely related work, or search for author's name and see what else they have written.

Searching Google Scholar

Use the "author:" operator, e.g., author:"d knuth" or author:"donald e knuth".

Put the paper's title in quotations: "A History of the China Sea".

You'll often get better results if you search only recent articles, but still sort them by relevance, not by date. E.g., click "Since 2018" in the left sidebar of the search results page.

To see the absolutely newest articles first, click "Sort by date" in the sidebar. If you use this feature a lot, you may also find it useful to setup email alerts to have new results automatically sent to you.

Note: On smaller screens that don't show the sidebar, these options are available in the dropdown menu labelled "Year" right below the search button.

Select the "Case law" option on the homepage or in the side drawer on the search results page.

It finds documents similar to the given search result.

It's in the side drawer. The advanced search window lets you search in the author, title, and publication fields, as well as limit your search results by date.

Select the "Case law" option and do a keyword search over all jurisdictions. Then, click the "Select courts" link in the left sidebar on the search results page.

Tip: To quickly search a frequently used selection of courts, bookmark a search results page with the desired selection.

Access to articles

For each Scholar search result, we try to find a version of the article that you can read. These access links are labelled [PDF] or [HTML] and appear to the right of the search result. For example:

A paper that you need to read

Access links cover a wide variety of ways in which articles may be available to you - articles that your library subscribes to, open access articles, free-to-read articles from publishers, preprints, articles in repositories, etc.

When you are on a campus network, access links automatically include your library subscriptions and direct you to subscribed versions of articles. On-campus access links cover subscriptions from primary publishers as well as aggregators.

Off-campus access

Off-campus access links let you take your library subscriptions with you when you are at home or traveling. You can read subscribed articles when you are off-campus just as easily as when you are on-campus. Off-campus access links work by recording your subscriptions when you visit Scholar while on-campus, and looking up the recorded subscriptions later when you are off-campus.

We use the recorded subscriptions to provide you with the same subscribed access links as you see on campus. We also indicate your subscription access to participating publishers so that they can allow you to read the full-text of these articles without logging in or using a proxy. The recorded subscription information expires after 30 days and is automatically deleted.

In addition to Google Scholar search results, off-campus access links can also appear on articles from publishers participating in the off-campus subscription access program. Look for links labeled [PDF] or [HTML] on the right hand side of article pages.

Anne Author , John Doe , Jane Smith , Someone Else

In this fascinating paper, we investigate various topics that would be of interest to you. We also describe new methods relevant to your project, and attempt to address several questions which you would also like to know the answer to. Lastly, we analyze …

You can disable off-campus access links on the Scholar settings page . Disabling off-campus access links will turn off recording of your library subscriptions. It will also turn off indicating subscription access to participating publishers. Once off-campus access links are disabled, you may need to identify and configure an alternate mechanism (e.g., an institutional proxy or VPN) to access your library subscriptions while off-campus.

Email Alerts

Do a search for the topic of interest, e.g., "M Theory"; click the envelope icon in the sidebar of the search results page; enter your email address, and click "Create alert". We'll then periodically email you newly published papers that match your search criteria.

No, you can enter any email address of your choice. If the email address isn't a Google account or doesn't match your Google account, then we'll email you a verification link, which you'll need to click to start receiving alerts.

This works best if you create a public profile , which is free and quick to do. Once you get to the homepage with your photo, click "Follow" next to your name, select "New citations to my articles", and click "Done". We will then email you when we find new articles that cite yours.

Search for the title of your paper, e.g., "Anti de Sitter space and holography"; click on the "Cited by" link at the bottom of the search result; and then click on the envelope icon in the left sidebar of the search results page.

First, do a search for your colleague's name, and see if they have a Scholar profile. If they do, click on it, click the "Follow" button next to their name, select "New articles by this author", and click "Done".

If they don't have a profile, do a search by author, e.g., [author:s-hawking], and click on the mighty envelope in the left sidebar of the search results page. If you find that several different people share the same name, you may need to add co-author names or topical keywords to limit results to the author you wish to follow.

We send the alerts right after we add new papers to Google Scholar. This usually happens several times a week, except that our search robots meticulously observe holidays.

There's a link to cancel the alert at the bottom of every notification email.

If you created alerts using a Google account, you can manage them all here . If you're not using a Google account, you'll need to unsubscribe from the individual alerts and subscribe to the new ones.

Google Scholar library

Google Scholar library is your personal collection of articles. You can save articles right off the search page, organize them by adding labels, and use the power of Scholar search to quickly find just the one you want - at any time and from anywhere. You decide what goes into your library, and we’ll keep the links up to date.

You get all the goodies that come with Scholar search results - links to PDF and to your university's subscriptions, formatted citations, citing articles, and more!

Library help

Find the article you want to add in Google Scholar and click the “Save” button under the search result.

Click “My library” at the top of the page or in the side drawer to view all articles in your library. To search the full text of these articles, enter your query as usual in the search box.

Find the article you want to remove, and then click the “Delete” button under it.

• To add a label to an article, find the article in your library, click the “Label” button under it, select the label you want to apply, and click “Done”.
• To view all the articles with a specific label, click the label name in the left sidebar of your library page.
• To remove a label from an article, click the “Label” button under it, deselect the label you want to remove, and click “Done”.
• To add, edit, or delete labels, click “Manage labels” in the left column of your library page.

Only you can see the articles in your library. If you create a Scholar profile and make it public, then the articles in your public profile (and only those articles) will be visible to everyone.

Your profile contains all the articles you have written yourself. It’s a way to present your work to others, as well as to keep track of citations to it. Your library is a way to organize the articles that you’d like to read or cite, not necessarily the ones you’ve written.

Citation Export

Click the "Cite" button under the search result and then select your bibliography manager at the bottom of the popup. We currently support BibTeX, EndNote, RefMan, and RefWorks.

Err, no, please respect our robots.txt when you access Google Scholar using automated software. As the wearers of crawler's shoes and webmaster's hat, we cannot recommend adherence to web standards highly enough.

Sorry, we're unable to provide bulk access. You'll need to make an arrangement directly with the source of the data you're interested in. Keep in mind that a lot of the records in Google Scholar come from commercial subscription services.

Sorry, we can only show up to 1,000 results for any particular search query. Try a different query to get more results.

Content Coverage

Google Scholar includes journal and conference papers, theses and dissertations, academic books, pre-prints, abstracts, technical reports and other scholarly literature from all broad areas of research. You'll find works from a wide variety of academic publishers, professional societies and university repositories, as well as scholarly articles available anywhere across the web. Google Scholar also includes court opinions and patents.

We index research articles and abstracts from most major academic publishers and repositories worldwide, including both free and subscription sources. To check current coverage of a specific source in Google Scholar, search for a sample of their article titles in quotes.

While we try to be comprehensive, it isn't possible to guarantee uninterrupted coverage of any particular source. We index articles from sources all over the web and link to these websites in our search results. If one of these websites becomes unavailable to our search robots or to a large number of web users, we have to remove it from Google Scholar until it becomes available again.

Our meticulous search robots generally try to index every paper from every website they visit, including most major sources and also many lesser known ones.

That said, Google Scholar is primarily a search of academic papers. Shorter articles, such as book reviews, news sections, editorials, announcements and letters, may or may not be included. Untitled documents and documents without authors are usually not included. Website URLs that aren't available to our search robots or to the majority of web users are, obviously, not included either. Nor do we include websites that require you to sign up for an account, install a browser plugin, watch four colorful ads, and turn around three times and say coo-coo before you can read the listing of titles scanned at 10 DPI... You get the idea, we cover academic papers from sensible websites.

That's usually because we index many of these papers from other websites, such as the websites of their primary publishers. The "site:" operator currently only searches the primary version of each paper.

It could also be that the papers are located on examplejournals.gov, not on example.gov. Please make sure you're searching for the "right" website.

That said, the best way to check coverage of a specific source is to search for a sample of their papers using the title of the paper.

Ahem, we index papers, not journals. You should also ask about our coverage of universities, research groups, proteins, seminal breakthroughs, and other dimensions that are of interest to users. All such questions are best answered by searching for a statistical sample of papers that has the property of interest - journal, author, protein, etc. Many coverage comparisons are available if you search for [allintitle:"google scholar"], but some of them are more statistically valid than others.

Currently, Google Scholar allows you to search and read published opinions of US state appellate and supreme court cases since 1950, US federal district, appellate, tax and bankruptcy courts since 1923 and US Supreme Court cases since 1791. In addition, it includes citations for cases cited by indexed opinions or journal articles which allows you to find influential cases (usually older or international) which are not yet online or publicly available.

Legal opinions in Google Scholar are provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied on as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed lawyer. Google does not warrant that the information is complete or accurate.

We normally add new papers several times a week. However, updates to existing records take 6-9 months to a year or longer, because in order to update our records, we need to first recrawl them from the source website. For many larger websites, the speed at which we can update their records is limited by the crawl rate that they allow.

Inclusion and Corrections

We apologize, and we assure you the error was unintentional. Automated extraction of information from articles in diverse fields can be tricky, so an error sometimes sneaks through.

Please write to the owner of the website where the erroneous search result is coming from, and encourage them to provide correct bibliographic data to us, as described in the technical guidelines . Once the data is corrected on their website, it usually takes 6-9 months to a year or longer for it to be updated in Google Scholar. We appreciate your help and your patience.

If you can't find your papers when you search for them by title and by author, please refer your publisher to our technical guidelines .

You can also deposit your papers into your institutional repository or put their PDF versions on your personal website, but please follow your publisher's requirements when you do so. See our technical guidelines for more details on the inclusion process.

We normally add new papers several times a week; however, it might take us some time to crawl larger websites, and corrections to already included papers can take 6-9 months to a year or longer.

Google Scholar generally reflects the state of the web as it is currently visible to our search robots and to the majority of users. When you're searching for relevant papers to read, you wouldn't want it any other way!

If your citation counts have gone down, chances are that either your paper or papers that cite it have either disappeared from the web entirely, or have become unavailable to our search robots, or, perhaps, have been reformatted in a way that made it difficult for our automated software to identify their bibliographic data and references. If you wish to correct this, you'll need to identify the specific documents with indexing problems and ask your publisher to fix them. Please refer to the technical guidelines .

Please do let us know . Please include the URL for the opinion, the corrected information and a source where we can verify the correction.

We're only able to make corrections to court opinions that are hosted on our own website. For corrections to academic papers, books, dissertations and other third-party material, click on the search result in question and contact the owner of the website where the document came from. For corrections to books from Google Book Search, click on the book's title and locate the link to provide feedback at the bottom of the book's page.

General Questions

These are articles which other scholarly articles have referred to, but which we haven't found online. To exclude them from your search results, uncheck the "include citations" box on the left sidebar.

First, click on links labeled [PDF] or [HTML] to the right of the search result's title. Also, check out the "All versions" link at the bottom of the search result.

Second, if you're affiliated with a university, using a computer on campus will often let you access your library's online subscriptions. Look for links labeled with your library's name to the right of the search result's title. Also, see if there's a link to the full text on the publisher's page with the abstract.

Keep in mind that final published versions are often only available to subscribers, and that some articles are not available online at all. Good luck!

Technically, your web browser remembers your settings in a "cookie" on your computer's disk, and sends this cookie to our website along with every search. Check that your browser isn't configured to discard our cookies. Also, check if disabling various proxies or overly helpful privacy settings does the trick. Either way, your settings are stored on your computer, not on our servers, so a long hard look at your browser's preferences or internet options should help cure the machine's forgetfulness.

Not even close. That phrase is our acknowledgement that much of scholarly research involves building on what others have already discovered. It's taken from Sir Isaac Newton's famous quote, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

• Privacy & Terms

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Balkan Med J
• v.38(5); 2021 Sep

Multiple Publications From the Same Dataset: Is It Acceptable?

Servet altay.

1 Department of Cardiology, Trakya University School of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey

Zafer Koçak

2 Editor-in-Chief, Balkan Medical Journal Department of Radiation Oncology, Trakya University School of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey

In recent years, the “publish or perish” approach has forced the academic environment and academics to give importance to quantity rather than quality. The rapid increase in the number of academic journals and publications in today's world brings about an increase in publication ethics violations.

One of the consequences of this trend has been the production of multiple publications from the same dataset. This issue cannot be discussed without mentioning research integrity, transparency, and ethical violation. However, there is no consensus on whether producing more than one publication from the same dataset is an ethical violation. This situation may be a violation of ethics and could prevent the publication of many articles that would contribute to the scientific literature, due to the fear of ethical violations. In this editorial, we discuss the issues and related definitions to consider when generating multiple publications from the same dataset.

It would make sense to start with the definitions of 2 important terms related to this topic; Duplicate (Redundant) and salami publications. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) defines a duplicate publication as “the publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published, without clear, visible reference to the previous publication.” 1 Salami slicing or a salami publication involves segmenting a large study into 2 or more publications. These segments are referred to as “slices” of a study. 2 , 3 The simplest example for slicing would be the publication of the results of a research based on gender and age group.

Salami slicing is considered an ethical violation in scientific publishing and may result in significant sanctions. However, it may be planned to produce more than one publication if a dataset contains multiple sub-datasets, or if the project outputs are too large to be reported in a single publication, or if the research has a secondary finding that was not discussed in the first article. 4 From a large-scale study, one article containing the initial outputs and one or more other articles reporting the secondary analysis may be produced. In this case, the authors cannot be expected to produce only one article from all the data obtained from a single study. In fact, not sharing scientifically important research results with the scientific world due to the fear of salami slicing may pose an ethical problem. 5 For example, the medical world needed all kinds of information about the COVID-19 pandemic that has shaken the world recently. All data coming out of the city of Wuhan, where the epidemic started, were important for humanity. The scientific world needed data on symptomatology, transmission, treatment methods, and in-hospital and short-term prognosis from the same patient records. Arab-Zozani et al., in their analysis, noted that in just 2.5 months, more than 3000 articles about COVID-19 were accepted by journals. 6 Refraining from producing other articles because an article had already been produced from these data would have blocked access to information that was very important for humanity. Therefore, researchers may produce more than one publication from the same dataset which they consider important for science and which would not disrupt the integrity of the research.

When you have to publish your data in more than one article, how can it be done without compromising the integrity of the research? In this case, it is important to know some points in order to avoid ethical violations.

It is most important that the authors are transparent and clearly state the reasons for this to the editor of the relevant journal. In other words, authors should share their previous work with the editors transparently and state this situation in the article. Another important factor is to ensure that these manuscripts are unique. In order to ensure the uniqueness of your second paper from the same dataset, you should consider the criteria outlined in Table 1 . 7

Some Factors to Consider as Uniqueness Criteria for Publishing Multiple Articles from the Same Dataset*

*Modified from the article by Kirkman et al. 7

In addition to these 2 important points mentioned above, authors should pay attention to the following points in order to avoid bias in the editorial evaluation and peer-review process and to avoid ethical violation investigations after the article has been accepted. 1 ,5,7- 10

• The cover letter should clearly inform the editor that there is a previous article on the same subject. The full text of the previously published article should be forwarded to the editor, and if possible, other studies planned on this subject should also be mentioned.
• The cover letter should also inform the editor regarding the titles specified in Table 1 , including the similarities/differences between the 2 articles.
• The previous study should be clearly stated in the article and the previous study should be referenced. While doing this, it would be more appropriate to indicate the previous publication in the text and the bibliography as “anonymous” until the peer-review process is over, to avoid influencing the peer-review process of the article.
• If the first and the main article belonging to the same database are in the submission process, if possible, it would be more appropriate not to send a second article to a journal before the evaluation process of the first article is completed.
• The author of the article should state why the second publication is needed, and what the new article adds to the previous article.
• All variables analyzed in the first publication should be included in the analyses to ensure consistency between articles.
• If a change has been made in an existing measurement or method in the previous article, the reason for this must be explained in the following study.

The fact that authors do not prefer to be transparent increases the risks of encountering ethical violation issues. Today, with the development of similarity-scanning programs, it has become easier to reveal cases of scientific misconduct. On the other hand, if the study includes the criteria that we have tried to explain above, it would not be wrong to encourage the authors to publish more than one article using a single data set. The key issue, as the ICMJE points out, is the attitude of researchers toward transparency and research integrity.

The ethics of publishing in two languages

• Published: 25 January 2020
• Volume 123 , pages 535–541, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

• Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva 1  

872 Accesses

3 Citations

32 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

A duplicate publication, or parts thereof, without disclosure, is now definitively considered to be an ethical infraction. The amount of duplication usually determines the correction that is necessary, either an erratum or a retraction. Such duplications can exist as a result of error, misconduct, or even gray areas in between. In the highly competitive market of scholarly and academic publishing, there exists constant pressure, and thus temptation, to boost output. Academics who are not native English speakers, or who publish in journals whose primary language is not English, may also consider publishing their data sets in their native language. There are increasing cases of duplicated data and papers in the English literature that have been corrected or retracted as a result of undeclared prior publication in another journal and language. This letter explores some of the discussion points surrounding duplicate publications in two languages. Provided that multiple sources in two or more languages that report the same data, text, ideas, concepts, methodologies or analyses are clearly cross-referenced, thereby alerting the editors, peers and readers that such aspects have been previously published, there is a reduced risk of an ethical infraction. In fact, secondary publications in two or more languages could benefit a wider pool of scientists. However, undeclared duplications, whole or in part, are considered to be ethical infractions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

“Papers are submitted to the Journal with the understanding that they, or their essential substance, have been neither published nor submitted elsewhere (including news media and controlled-circulation publications). This restriction does not apply to (a) abstracts published in connection with meetings, or (b) press reports resulting from formal and public oral presentation” (pp. 676–677).

Rogers ( 2000a ) argued, emphatically, that “Previously published in any language, previously published anywhere in the world, previously published in part or in whole, previously published in print or on electronic media, previously published regardless of whether that publication is listed in the Index Medicus , and previously published with or without the requirement for signing a transfer of copyright. Previously published means previously published, published anywhere under any condition; nothing more, nothing less” (pp. 1487).

Rogers ( 2000b ) stated: “The fact remains that these authors signed the AJR 's exclusive publication statement, in essence denying the fact that they had indeed previously published, at least, a very similar article if not the same article in another journal. It makes no difference that this was in another language, not in English, not peer reviewed, nor that no copyright agreement had been required or signed by the authors for the original publication” (pp. 1487).

https://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=17886&tip=sid .

https://www.arrs.org/uploadedFiles/ARRS/Publications/authorGuidelines.pdf .

https://www.elsevier.com/_data/assets/pdf_file/0019/70228/redundant-publication-A.pdf ; https://www.elsevier.com/_data/assets/pdf_file/0020/70229/redundant-publication-B_0.pdf .

https://www.elsevier.com/_data/assets/pdf_file/0012/653889/Simultaneous-Submission-factsheet-March-2019.pdf : “Submitting a paper to journals in different languages without acknowledgment of the original paper. Is it unethical? Yes” (p. 2; March, 2019); https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics ; https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/multiple-duplicate-concurrent-publication-simultaneous-submission .

https://taylorandfrancis.com/about/corporate-responsibility/publishing-ethics/ ; https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/ethics-for-authors/ .

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/02713683.2012.645404 referring to the retraction of three papers (“The above articles duplicate previously published work and are hereby retracted in both the print and online editions of Current Eye Research . These articles appeared earlier in Chinese-language journals (referenced below). As far as can be determined, no permission was sought for the translation and re-publication of the articles. The English-language versions do not cite or refer to the prior publications, and are therefore redundant to scientific literature”).

https://www.hindawi.com/ethics/#duplicatesubmission : “Hindawi journals consider only original content, i.e. articles that have not been previously published, including in a language other than English”.

https://authorservices.wiley.com/ethics-guidelines/research-integrity.html : “the copyright transfer Agreement, exclusive License Agreement or the open Access Agreement, one of which must be submitted before publication in any Wiley journal, requires signature from the corresponding author to warrant that the article is an original work, has not been published before, and is not being considered for publication elsewhere in its final form” p. 3).

https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/editors/publishing-ethics-for-journals/4176 .

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10853-019-03408-9 (“The Editor-in-Chief has retracted this article [1] because it has been previously published by the same author in a Chinese-language journal [2]. Some additional text is included in the English version of the article, but most of the text and all the figures are the same as in the article that was written in Chinese. The Chinese-language publication was not cited in the duplicate publication”).

https://www.springer.com/journal/11192/submission-guidelines (“The submitted work should be original and should not have been published elsewhere in any form or language (partially or in full)”).

http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/overlapping-publications.html . Several statements are worth highlighting: “Authors should not submit the same manuscript, in the same or different languages, simultaneously to more than one journal. The rationale for this standard is the potential for disagreement when two (or more) journals claim the right to publish a manuscript that has been submitted simultaneously to more than one journal, and the possibility that two or more journals will unknowingly and unnecessarily undertake the work of peer review, edit the same manuscript, and publish the same article”; “Duplicate publication is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published, without clear, visible reference to the previous publication”; “Readers … deserve to be able to trust that what they are reading is original”; “The bases of this position are international copyright laws, ethical conduct, and cost-effective use of resources. Duplicate publication of original research is particularly problematic because it can result in inadvertent double-counting of data or inappropriate weighting of the results of a single study, which distorts the available evidence”; “Authors who attempt duplicate publication without such notification should expect at least prompt rejection of the submitted manuscript. If the editor was not aware of the violations and the article has already been published, then the article might warrant retraction with or without the author’s explanation or approval”.

https://www.jmaj.jp/instruction.php : section 9.3 “Articles that have been previously published or are being considered for publication in another journal in any language will not be accepted.”; section 9.5 “Articles that are being considered for publication in another journal including advanced publications such as “in-press” or “E-pub ahead of print” articles in any language might be regarded as redundant or duplicate publication.”; section 9.8 “All manuscripts submitted to the JMA Journal must represent the authors’ original work and not duplicate any other previously published work in any language”.

https://ascelibrary.org/doi/full/10.1061/%28ASCE%29IR.1943-4774.0001332 : in this case in Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering , one of the reasons for retraction was previous publication in Farsi.

https://doi.org/10.3109/02713683.2015.1024548 : in this case in Current Eye Research , the reason for retraction was previous publication in German.

https://www.ehu.eus/ojs/index.php/THEORIA/about/submissions#authorGuidelines : in Theoria , an open access journal published by UPV/EHU Press, a curious statement is made regarding duplication in two languages: “We have a strict policy of avoiding duplicate publication. In particular, we do not consider for publication Spanish versions of papers already published in English”.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/russian-journals-retract-more-800-papers-after-bombshell-investigation : “In September 2019, after sifting through 4.3 million Russian-language studies, Antiplagiat found that more than 70,000 were published at least twice; a few were published as many as 17 times. Chekhovich believes most instances are due to self-plagiarism”.

https://wame.org/recommendations-on-publication-ethics-policies-for-medical-journals#Originality : “Redundant publication occurs when multiple papers, without full cross reference in the text, share the same data, or results. Republication of a paper in another language, or simultaneously in multiple journals with different audiences, may be acceptable, provided that there is full and prominent disclosure of its original source at the time of submission of the manuscript. At the time of submission, authors should disclose details of related papers they have authored, even if in a different language, similar papers in press, and any closely related papers previously published or currently under review at another journal”.

http://www.ithenticate.com/products/faqs : iThenticate ® is one of the most popular similarity/plagiarism detection tools used by a large number of commercial academic publishers. Yet, the company indicates that even though it is able to check for similarities in 30 languages, those matches are in same-language comparisons only (i.e., duplications across bi- or multilingual papers is still not possible): “Which international languages does iThenticate have content for in its database? iThenticate searches for content matches in the following 30 languages: Chinese (simplified and traditional), Japanese, Thai, Korean, Catalan, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Norwegian (Bokmal, Nynorsk), Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish, Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, Farsi, Russian, and Turkish. Please note that iThenticate will match text between text of the same language”.

https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273X/9/3/85/htm : “the paper published in Biomolecules in 2018 was published by the same authors in 2017 in Chinese in China Tea Processing ”. Of note, unretracted copies of this retracted paper continue to exist on research social media sites such as ResearcGate ( https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327879735 ) or even on the pirate site Sci-Hub ( https://sci-hub.tw/10.3390/biom8040099 ), allowing other researchers without knowledge and who might not access the source publication from the publisher’s website to continue to cite this retracted paper (Teixeira da Silva and Bornemann-Cimenti 2017 ).

https://www.mdpi.com/journal/languages/instructions : “Manuscripts submitted to Languages should neither been published before nor be under consideration for publication in another journal”; “Republishing content that is not novel is not tolerated (for example, an English translation of a paper that is already published in another language will not be accepted)”.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03009742.2019.1655241 : the retraction statement by the editors and publisher (Taylor & Francis) in the Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology does not specifically mention that the prior publication was in Chinese, which was gleaned from the authors’ statement: “The authors of the latter paper did this because they thought that publishing a paper in Chinese language would not contradict our submission to Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology in English. Clearly, this is a misunderstanding of the academic rules”.

See ICMJE definition in the link in footnote 13.

http://pleiades.online/en/authors/declaration/ : As one example, Nauka Publishing House in collaboration with Pleiades Publishing Ltd./Allerton Press Inc. publish translated articles (Russian to English) of the Russian Academy of Sciences that are then published by Springer Nature. Such openly previously agreed-upon secondary publications are not redundant duplications in two languages, and do not violate the ethical guidelines of these publishers. However, any additional undeclared copies (part or whole) of these dual secondary publications would constitute a violation of such ethics codes.

Alfonso, F., Bermejo, J., & Segovia, J. (2005). Duplicate or redundant publication: Can we afford it? Revista Española de Cardiología, 58 (5), 601–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1885-5857(06)60739-1 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Chen, W., Xing, Q.-R., Wang, H., & Wang, T. (2018). Retracted publications in the biomedical literature with authors from mainland China. Scientometrics, 114 (1), 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2565-x .

Di Bitetti, S., & Ferreras, J. A. (2017). Publish (in English) or perish: The effect on citation rate of using languages other than English in scientific publications. Ambio, 46, 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0820-7 .

Habibzadeh, F., & Winker, M. A. (2009). Duplicate publication and plagiarism: causes and cures. Notfall + Rettungsmedizin, 12, 415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10049-009-1229-7 .

Johnson, R., Watkinson, A., & Mabe, M. (2018). The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly publishing, October, 5th edn, by the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands, 213 pp. Retrieved January 10, 2020, from https://www.stm-assoc.org/2018_10_04_STM_Report_2018.pdf .

Kempers, R. D. (2002). Ethical issues in biomedical publications. Fertility and Sterility, 77 (5), 883–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03076-5 .

Mihara, N., Ichikado, K., Johkoh, T., Honda, O., Higashi, M., Tomiyama, N., et al. (1999). The subtypes of localized bronchioloalveolar carcinoma: CT-pathologic correlation in 18 cases. American Journal of Roentgenology, 173 (1), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.173.1.10397103 .

New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). (1969). Definition of “sole contribution”. New England Journal of Medicine, 28, 676–677. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM196909182811208 .

Rogers, L. F. (2000a). In any language. American Journal of Roentgenology, 174 (6), 1487. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.174.6.1741487 .

Rogers, L. F. (2000b). Duplicate publication or not? Case I. American Journal of Roentgenology, 174 (6), 1789–1790. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.174.6.1741789 .

Shen, H.-J. (2019). Retraction Note to: MD simulations on the melting and compression of C, SiC and Si nanotubes. Journal of Materials Science, 54, 8057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-019-03408-9 .

Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2017). The Journal Impact Factor (JIF): Science publishing’s miscalculating metric. Academic Questions, 30 (4), 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-017-9671-3 .

Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Al-Khatib, A. (2020). Ending the retraction stigma: encouraging the reporting of errors in the biomedical record. Research Ethics . https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016118802970 .

Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Bornemann-Cimenti, H. (2017). Why do some retracted papers continue to be cited? Scientometrics, 110 (1), 365–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2178-9 .

Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Tsigaris, P. (2018). Academics must list all publications on their CV. KOME, 6 (1), 94–99. https://doi.org/10.17646/KOME.2018.16 .

Tramèr, M. R., Reynolds, D. J. M., Moore, R. A., & McQuay, H. J. (1997). Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: A case study. British Medical Journal, 315, 635–640. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.635 .

Tucker, J. D., Chang, H., Brandt, A., Gao, X., Lin, M., Luo, J., et al. (2011). An empirical analysis of overlap publication in Chinese language and English research manuscripts. PLoS ONE, 6 (7), e22149. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022149 .

Wang, T., Xing, Q.-R., Wang, H., & Chen, W. (2019). Retracted publications in the biomedical literature from open access journals. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25, 855–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0040-6 .

Yank, V., & Barnes, D. (2003). Consensus and contention regarding redundant publications in clinical research: Cross-sectional survey of editors and authors. Journal of Medical Ethics, 29, 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.29.2.109 .

Zhang, Y.-H. (2013). Bilingual (multilingual) publications and duplicate publications: For or against? Journal of Zhejiang University—Science A (Applied Physics & Engineering), 14 (9), 687–690. https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.A1300272 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

P. O. Box 7, Miki-cho Post Office, 3011-2, Ikenobe, Kagawa-ken, 761-0799, Japan

Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The author contributed entirely to the intellectual discussion underlying this paper, literature exploration, writing, reviews and editing, and accepts responsibility for the content of this letter.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest.

The author declares no conflicts of interest of relevance to this topic.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Teixeira da Silva, J.A. The ethics of publishing in two languages. Scientometrics 123 , 535–541 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03363-2

Download citation

Received : 05 January 2020

Published : 25 January 2020

Issue Date : April 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03363-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Accountability
• Editorial responsibility
• Peer review
• Quality control
• Secondary publication
• Transparency
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game New
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing
• Research Papers

How to Write and Publish Your Research in a Journal

Last Updated: February 26, 2024 Fact Checked

Choosing a Journal

Writing the research paper, editing & revising your paper, submitting your paper, navigating the peer review process, research paper help.

This article was co-authored by Matthew Snipp, PhD and by wikiHow staff writer, Cheyenne Main . C. Matthew Snipp is the Burnet C. and Mildred Finley Wohlford Professor of Humanities and Sciences in the Department of Sociology at Stanford University. He is also the Director for the Institute for Research in the Social Science’s Secure Data Center. He has been a Research Fellow at the U.S. Bureau of the Census and a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. He has published 3 books and over 70 articles and book chapters on demography, economic development, poverty and unemployment. He is also currently serving on the National Institute of Child Health and Development’s Population Science Subcommittee. He holds a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin—Madison. There are 13 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 697,716 times.

Publishing a research paper in a peer-reviewed journal allows you to network with other scholars, get your name and work into circulation, and further refine your ideas and research. Before submitting your paper, make sure it reflects all the work you’ve done and have several people read over it and make comments. Keep reading to learn how you can choose a journal, prepare your work for publication, submit it, and revise it after you get a response back.

Things You Should Know

• Create a list of journals you’d like to publish your work in and choose one that best aligns with your topic and your desired audience.
• Prepare your manuscript using the journal’s requirements and ask at least 2 professors or supervisors to review your paper.
• Write a cover letter that “sells” your manuscript, says how your research adds to your field and explains why you chose the specific journal you’re submitting to.

• Ask your professors or supervisors for well-respected journals that they’ve had good experiences publishing with and that they read regularly.
• Many journals also only accept specific formats, so by choosing a journal before you start, you can write your article to their specifications and increase your chances of being accepted.
• If you’ve already written a paper you’d like to publish, consider whether your research directly relates to a hot topic or area of research in the journals you’re looking into.

• Review the journal’s peer review policies and submission process to see if you’re comfortable creating or adjusting your work according to their standards.
• Open-access journals can increase your readership because anyone can access them.

• Scientific research papers: Instead of a “thesis,” you might write a “research objective” instead. This is where you state the purpose of your research.
• “This paper explores how George Washington’s experiences as a young officer may have shaped his views during difficult circumstances as a commanding officer.”
• “This paper contends that George Washington’s experiences as a young officer on the 1750s Pennsylvania frontier directly impacted his relationship with his Continental Army troops during the harsh winter at Valley Forge.”

• Scientific research papers: Include a “materials and methods” section with the step-by-step process you followed and the materials you used. [5] X Research source
• Read other research papers in your field to see how they’re written. Their format, writing style, subject matter, and vocabulary can help guide your own paper. [6] X Research source

• If you’re writing about George Washington’s experiences as a young officer, you might emphasize how this research changes our perspective of the first president of the U.S.
• Link this section to your thesis or research objective.
• If you’re writing a paper about ADHD, you might discuss other applications for your research.

• Scientific research papers: You might include your research and/or analytical methods, your main findings or results, and the significance or implications of your research.
• Try to get as many people as you can to read over your abstract and provide feedback before you submit your paper to a journal.

• They might also provide templates to help you structure your manuscript according to their specific guidelines. [11] X Research source

• Not all journal reviewers will be experts on your specific topic, so a non-expert “outsider’s perspective” can be valuable.

• If you have a paper on the purification of wastewater with fungi, you might use both the words “fungi” and “mushrooms.”
• Use software like iThenticate, Turnitin, or PlagScan to check for similarities between the submitted article and published material available online. [15] X Research source

• Header: Address the editor who will be reviewing your manuscript by their name, include the date of submission, and the journal you are submitting to.
• First paragraph: Include the title of your manuscript, the type of paper it is (like review, research, or case study), and the research question you wanted to answer and why.
• Second paragraph: Explain what was done in your research, your main findings, and why they are significant to your field.
• Third paragraph: Explain why the journal’s readers would be interested in your work and why your results are important to your field.
• Conclusion: State the author(s) and any journal requirements that your work complies with (like ethical standards”).
• “We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.”
• “All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [insert the name of the target journal].”

• Submit your article to only one journal at a time.
• When submitting online, use your university email account. This connects you with a scholarly institution, which can add credibility to your work.

• Accept: Only minor adjustments are needed, based on the provided feedback by the reviewers. A first submission will rarely be accepted without any changes needed.
• Revise and Resubmit: Changes are needed before publication can be considered, but the journal is still very interested in your work.
• Reject and Resubmit: Extensive revisions are needed. Your work may not be acceptable for this journal, but they might also accept it if significant changes are made.
• Reject: The paper isn’t and won’t be suitable for this publication, but that doesn’t mean it might not work for another journal.

• Try organizing the reviewer comments by how easy it is to address them. That way, you can break your revisions down into more manageable parts.
• If you disagree with a comment made by a reviewer, try to provide an evidence-based explanation when you resubmit your paper.

• If you’re resubmitting your paper to the same journal, include a point-by-point response paper that talks about how you addressed all of the reviewers’ comments in your revision. [22] X Research source
• If you’re not sure which journal to submit to next, you might be able to ask the journal editor which publications they recommend.

Expert Q&A

You might also like.

• If reviewers suspect that your submitted manuscript plagiarizes another work, they may refer to a Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowchart to see how to move forward. [23] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

• ↑ https://www.wiley.com/en-us/network/publishing/research-publishing/choosing-a-journal/6-steps-to-choosing-the-right-journal-for-your-research-infographic
• ↑ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z
• ↑ https://libguides.unomaha.edu/c.php?g=100510&p=651627
• ↑ http://www.canberra.edu.au/library/start-your-research/research_help/publishing-research
• ↑ https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/conclusions
• ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/writing-an-abstract-for-your-research-paper/
• ↑ https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/book-authors-editors/your-publication-journey/manuscript-preparation
• ↑ https://apus.libanswers.com/writing/faq/2391
• ↑ https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/keyword/search-strategy
• ↑ https://ifis.libguides.com/journal-publishing-guide/submitting-your-paper
• ↑ https://www.springer.com/kr/authors-editors/authorandreviewertutorials/submitting-to-a-journal-and-peer-review/cover-letters/10285574
• ↑ http://www.apa.org/monitor/sep02/publish.aspx
• ↑ Matthew Snipp, PhD. Research Fellow, U.S. Bureau of the Census. Expert Interview. 26 March 2020.

About This Article

To publish a research paper, ask a colleague or professor to review your paper and give you feedback. Once you've revised your work, familiarize yourself with different academic journals so that you can choose the publication that best suits your paper. Make sure to look at the "Author's Guide" so you can format your paper according to the guidelines for that publication. Then, submit your paper and don't get discouraged if it is not accepted right away. You may need to revise your paper and try again. To learn about the different responses you might get from journals, see our reviewer's explanation below. Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

RAMDEV GOHIL

Oct 16, 2017

Did this article help you?

David Okandeji

Oct 23, 2019

Revati Joshi

Feb 13, 2017

Shahzad Khan

Jul 1, 2017

Apr 7, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades

The gender gap in pay has remained relatively stable in the United States over the past 20 years or so. In 2022, women earned an average of 82% of what men earned, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of median hourly earnings of both full- and part-time workers. These results are similar to where the pay gap stood in 2002, when women earned 80% as much as men.

As has long been the case, the wage gap is smaller for workers ages 25 to 34 than for all workers 16 and older. In 2022, women ages 25 to 34 earned an average of 92 cents for every dollar earned by a man in the same age group – an 8-cent gap. By comparison, the gender pay gap among workers of all ages that year was 18 cents.

While the gender pay gap has not changed much in the last two decades, it has narrowed considerably when looking at the longer term, both among all workers ages 16 and older and among those ages 25 to 34. The estimated 18-cent gender pay gap among all workers in 2022 was down from 35 cents in 1982. And the 8-cent gap among workers ages 25 to 34 in 2022 was down from a 26-cent gap four decades earlier.

The gender pay gap measures the difference in median hourly earnings between men and women who work full or part time in the United States. Pew Research Center’s estimate of the pay gap is based on an analysis of Current Population Survey (CPS) monthly outgoing rotation group files ( IPUMS ) from January 1982 to December 2022, combined to create annual files. To understand how we calculate the gender pay gap, read our 2013 post, “How Pew Research Center measured the gender pay gap.”

The COVID-19 outbreak affected data collection efforts by the U.S. government in its surveys, especially in 2020 and 2021, limiting in-person data collection and affecting response rates. It is possible that some measures of economic outcomes and how they vary across demographic groups are affected by these changes in data collection.

In addition to findings about the gender wage gap, this analysis includes information from a Pew Research Center survey about the perceived reasons for the pay gap, as well as the pressures and career goals of U.S. men and women. The survey was conducted among 5,098 adults and includes a subset of questions asked only for 2,048 adults who are employed part time or full time, from Oct. 10-16, 2022. Everyone who took part is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Here are the questions used in this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology .

The  U.S. Census Bureau has also analyzed the gender pay gap, though its analysis looks only at full-time workers (as opposed to full- and part-time workers). In 2021, full-time, year-round working women earned 84% of what their male counterparts earned, on average, according to the Census Bureau’s most recent analysis.

Much of the gender pay gap has been explained by measurable factors such as educational attainment, occupational segregation and work experience. The narrowing of the gap over the long term is attributable in large part to gains women have made in each of these dimensions.

Related: The Enduring Grip of the Gender Pay Gap

Even though women have increased their presence in higher-paying jobs traditionally dominated by men, such as professional and managerial positions, women as a whole continue to be overrepresented in lower-paying occupations relative to their share of the workforce. This may contribute to gender differences in pay.

Other factors that are difficult to measure, including gender discrimination, may also contribute to the ongoing wage discrepancy.

Perceived reasons for the gender wage gap

When asked about the factors that may play a role in the gender wage gap, half of U.S. adults point to women being treated differently by employers as a major reason, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in October 2022. Smaller shares point to women making different choices about how to balance work and family (42%) and working in jobs that pay less (34%).

There are some notable differences between men and women in views of what’s behind the gender wage gap. Women are much more likely than men (61% vs. 37%) to say a major reason for the gap is that employers treat women differently. And while 45% of women say a major factor is that women make different choices about how to balance work and family, men are slightly less likely to hold that view (40% say this).

Parents with children younger than 18 in the household are more likely than those who don’t have young kids at home (48% vs. 40%) to say a major reason for the pay gap is the choices that women make about how to balance family and work. On this question, differences by parental status are evident among both men and women.

Views about reasons for the gender wage gap also differ by party. About two-thirds of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (68%) say a major factor behind wage differences is that employers treat women differently, but far fewer Republicans and Republican leaners (30%) say the same. Conversely, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say women’s choices about how to balance family and work (50% vs. 36%) and their tendency to work in jobs that pay less (39% vs. 30%) are major reasons why women earn less than men.

Democratic and Republican women are more likely than their male counterparts in the same party to say a major reason for the gender wage gap is that employers treat women differently. About three-quarters of Democratic women (76%) say this, compared with 59% of Democratic men. And while 43% of Republican women say unequal treatment by employers is a major reason for the gender wage gap, just 18% of GOP men share that view.

Pressures facing working women and men

Family caregiving responsibilities bring different pressures for working women and men, and research has shown that being a mother can reduce women’s earnings , while fatherhood can increase men’s earnings .

Employed women and men are about equally likely to say they feel a great deal of pressure to support their family financially and to be successful in their jobs and careers, according to the Center’s October survey. But women, and particularly working mothers, are more likely than men to say they feel a great deal of pressure to focus on responsibilities at home.

About half of employed women (48%) report feeling a great deal of pressure to focus on their responsibilities at home, compared with 35% of employed men. Among working mothers with children younger than 18 in the household, two-thirds (67%) say the same, compared with 45% of working dads.

When it comes to supporting their family financially, similar shares of working moms and dads (57% vs. 62%) report they feel a great deal of pressure, but this is driven mainly by the large share of unmarried working mothers who say they feel a great deal of pressure in this regard (77%). Among those who are married, working dads are far more likely than working moms (60% vs. 43%) to say they feel a great deal of pressure to support their family financially. (There were not enough unmarried working fathers in the sample to analyze separately.)

About four-in-ten working parents say they feel a great deal of pressure to be successful at their job or career. These findings don’t differ by gender.

Gender differences in job roles, aspirations

Overall, a quarter of employed U.S. adults say they are currently the boss or one of the top managers where they work, according to the Center’s survey. Another 33% say they are not currently the boss but would like to be in the future, while 41% are not and do not aspire to be the boss or one of the top managers.

Men are more likely than women to be a boss or a top manager where they work (28% vs. 21%). This is especially the case among employed fathers, 35% of whom say they are the boss or one of the top managers where they work. (The varying attitudes between fathers and men without children at least partly reflect differences in marital status and educational attainment between the two groups.)

In addition to being less likely than men to say they are currently the boss or a top manager at work, women are also more likely to say they wouldn’t want to be in this type of position in the future. More than four-in-ten employed women (46%) say this, compared with 37% of men. Similar shares of men (35%) and women (31%) say they are not currently the boss but would like to be one day. These patterns are similar among parents.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published on March 22, 2019. Anna Brown and former Pew Research Center writer/editor Amanda Barroso contributed to an earlier version of this analysis. Here are the questions used in this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology .

What is the gender wage gap in your metropolitan area? Find out with our pay gap calculator

• Gender & Work
• Gender Equality & Discrimination
• Gender Pay Gap
• Gender Roles

Women have gained ground in the nation’s highest-paying occupations, but still lag behind men

Diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, the enduring grip of the gender pay gap, more than twice as many americans support than oppose the #metoo movement, women now outnumber men in the u.s. college-educated labor force, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy