While not all researchers prioritize social impact, it is undeniably a crucial aspect that adds significance to their work. The objective of this paper is to explore potential gender differences in the social attention paid to researchers and to examine their association with specific fields of study. To achieve this goal, the paper analyzes four dimensions of social influence and examines three measures of social attention to researchers. The dimensions are media influence (mentions in mainstream news), political influence (mentions in public policy reports), social media influence (mentions in Twitter), and educational influence (mentions in Wikipedia). The measures of social attention to researchers are: proportion of publications with social mentions (social attention orientation), mentions per publication (level of social attention), and mentions per mentioned publication (intensity of social attention). By analyzing the rankings of authors -- for the four dimensions with the three measures in the 22 research fields of the Web of Science database -- and by using Spearman correlation coefficients, we conclude that: 1) significant differences are observed between fields; 2) the dimensions capture different and independent aspects of the social impact. Finally, we use non-parametric means comparison tests to detect gender bias in social attention. We conclude that for most fields and dimensions with enough non-zero altmetrics data, gender differences in social attention are not predominant, but are still present and vary across fields.

翻译：尽管并非所有研究者都将社会影响力视为首要目标，但社会影响力无疑是提升其研究价值的关键因素。本文旨在探究研究者获得的社会关注是否存在性别差异，并分析这种差异与具体研究领域的关系。为此，我们从四个社会影响维度（媒体影响力（主流新闻提及）、政治影响力（公共政策报告提及）、社交媒体影响力（推特提及）及教育影响力（维基百科提及））出发，结合三项社会关注度指标（具有社会提及的论文占比（社会关注倾向）、每篇论文的提及次数（社会关注水平）及每篇被提及论文的提及次数（社会关注强度））展开分析。通过Web of Science数据库22个研究领域中作者排名（涵盖四个维度与三项指标）的斯皮尔曼相关系数分析，我们得出以下结论：1）不同领域间存在显著差异；2）各维度捕捉到社会影响的不同独立方面。最后，我们采用非参数均值比较检验检测社会关注中的性别偏差。研究表明，在大多数拥有足够非零替代计量数据的领域与维度中，社会关注的性别差异虽非主导性因素，但依然存在且随领域不同而变化。