Bedoor Alshebli
Biographic Data
| ID | 1756566 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Bedoor Alshebli |
| GIVEN NAMES | Bedoor |
| FAMILY NAME | Alshebli |
| SIGNATURE | ALSHEBLI B |
| AFFILIATIONS | New York University Abu Dhabi |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-1775-5162 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 4 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 3 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 4 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2018 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 1 |
Characterizing the effect of retractions on publishing careers
Retracting academic papers is a fundamental tool of quality control, but it may have far-reaching consequences for retracted authors and their careers. Previous studies have highlighted the adverse effects of retractions on citation counts and the citations of co-authors; however, the broader impacts beyond these have not been fully explored. Here we address this gap by leveraging Retraction Watch, the most extensive dataset on retractions and li…
Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors
Scientific editors shape the content of academic journals and set standards for their fields. Yet, the degree to which the gender makeup of editors reflects that of scientists, and the rate at which editors publish in their own journals, are not entirely understood. Here, we use algorithmic tools to infer the gender of 81,000 editors serving more than 1,000 journals and 15 disciplines over five decades. Only 26% of authors in our dataset are wome…
Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration
How predictable are life trajectories? We investigated this question with a scientific mass collaboration using the common task method; 160 teams built predictive models for six life outcomes using data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, a high-quality birth cohort study. Despite using a rich dataset and applying machine-learning methods optimized for prediction, the best predictions were not very accurate and were only slightly…
The preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration
Inspired by the social and economic benefits of diversity, we analyze over 9 million papers and 6 million scientists to study the relationship between research impact and five classes of diversity: ethnicity, discipline, gender, affiliation, and academic age. Using randomized baseline models, we establish the presence of homophily in ethnicity, gender and affiliation. We then study the effect of diversity on scientific impact, as reflected in cit…
Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors
Scientific editors shape the content of academic journals and set standards for their fields. Yet, the degree to which the gender makeup of editors reflects that of scientists, and the rate at which editors publish in their own journals, are not entirely understood. Here, we use algorithmic tools to infer the gender of 81,000 editors serving more than 1,000 journals and 15 disciplines over five decades. Only 26% of authors in our dataset are wome…
The preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration
Inspired by the social and economic benefits of diversity, we analyze over 9 million papers and 6 million scientists to study the relationship between research impact and five classes of diversity: ethnicity, discipline, gender, affiliation, and academic age. Using randomized baseline models, we establish the presence of homophily in ethnicity, gender and affiliation. We then study the effect of diversity on scientific impact, as reflected in cit…
Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration
How predictable are life trajectories? We investigated this question with a scientific mass collaboration using the common task method; 160 teams built predictive models for six life outcomes using data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, a high-quality birth cohort study. Despite using a rich dataset and applying machine-learning methods optimized for prediction, the best predictions were not very accurate and were only slightly…
Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors
Scientific editors shape the content of academic journals and set standards for their fields. Yet, the degree to which the gender makeup of editors reflects that of scientists, and the rate at which editors publish in their own journals, are not entirely understood. Here, we use algorithmic tools to infer the gender of 81,000 editors serving more than 1,000 journals and 15 disciplines over five decades. Only 26% of authors in our dataset are wome…
Characterizing the effect of retractions on publishing careers
Retracting academic papers is a fundamental tool of quality control, but it may have far-reaching consequences for retracted authors and their careers. Previous studies have highlighted the adverse effects of retractions on citation counts and the citations of co-authors; however, the broader impacts beyond these have not been fully explored. Here we address this gap by leveraging Retraction Watch, the most extensive dataset on retractions and li…
Psychology (3 works) · scientometrics and bibliometrics research (3 works) · Law (2 works) · Medicine (2 works) · Political science (2 works) · Academic integrity and plagiarism (1 works) · Academic Publishing and Open Access (1 works) · Advanced Causal Inference Techniques (1 works) · Anthropology (1 works) · Artificial Intelligence (1 works)