This paper examines the relationship between the genderedness of authors' first names and citation distributions in scholarly production. Merging a first name genderedness table derived from Wikidata with bibliometric data from articles by US-affiliated authors published between 2010 and 2019 and indexed in the Web of Science, we develop a relative distributional framework that compares name, article, and citation counts along a continuous genderedness spectrum. Results show that the lexical structure of the corpus, as captured by the relationship between unique first names (types) and the number of their occurrences (tokens), proves highly stable across author roles. Productivity analyses reveal that disciplinary groups diverge substantially in the direction of the imbalance between femininely- and masculinely-gendered names, with physical sciences showing a consistent masculine skew and social sciences a tendency toward the feminine end of the spectrum. Strikingly, however, the amplitude of distributional divergence remains relatively stable across disciplinary groups, in contrast to its substantial variations in direction. Citation analyses reveal a pervasive citation deficit for femininely- and neutrally-gendered names across all disciplinary groups and author roles. This asymmetry is most consistent across author roles in the life sciences, and absent in the physical sciences except among middle authors, whose unparalleled share plausibly reflects the citation dynamics of large collaborative structures. Overall, although the data and research design support associative rather than causal claims, the trends they reveal are nonetheless consistent with the hypothesis that first name genderedness influences citation recognition through implicit bias operating in low-deliberation evaluative contexts.

翻译：本文探讨了作者名字的性别化程度与学术成果引用分布之间的关系。通过将源自维基数据（Wikidata）的名字性别化表格与2010至2019年间美国附属作者发表、并被Web of Science收录的文章的文献计量数据相结合，我们构建了一个相对分布框架，用于沿连续性别化谱系比较名字、文章和引用数量。结果表明，该语料库的词汇结构（通过唯一名字即“类型”与其出现次数即“标记”之间的关系来刻画）在不同作者角色间表现出高度稳定性。生产力分析显示，学科群体在女性化与男性化名字分布不平衡的方向上存在显著差异：物理科学呈现持续的男性化偏向，而社会科学则倾向于谱系的女性化一端。然而引人注目的是，与方向上的巨大变化相比，分布分歧的幅度在各学科群体间保持相对稳定。引用分析揭示出，在所有学科群体和作者角色中，女性化和中性化名字均普遍存在引用不足现象。这一不对称性在生命科学领域的不同作者角色间最为一致，而在物理科学中则不存在（除中间作者外），中间作者更高的引用份额可能反映了大型合作结构中的引用动态。总体而言，尽管数据和研究设计支持关联性而非因果性结论，但所揭示的趋势与如下假设一致：在低思考评估情境中，名字性别化通过隐性偏见影响引用认可。