Unveiling the Gender Productivity Gap in Brazilian Psychology Graduate Programs

A groundbreaking new study has shed light on persistent gender disparities in research output among faculty in Brazilian psychology graduate programs. Published on February 8, 2026, in Trends in Psychology, the research titled "Graduate Program Rating Moderates the Gender Productivity Gap in Brazilian Psychology: A Multilevel Analysis of Research Output" reveals that while men generally outperform women in article production, this gap narrows or disappears in top-rated programs.

The study analyzed data from 1,482 faculty members across 100 psychology graduate programs, using publicly available information from the Lattes CV platform and the Sucupira system. Researchers computed a quality-weighted score for each faculty's articles based on the Qualis journal ranking—a Brazilian system where top journals like A1 score 100 points, scaling down to C at 0. This metric provides a nuanced view beyond mere publication counts, accounting for journal prestige.

Key takeaway: Men's average scores were 32% higher than women's overall (rate ratio RR = 1.32, 95% CI [1.15, 1.51]). However, the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)—Brazil's agency for graduate education quality—program ratings play a moderating role. The male advantage was significant only in programs rated 3, 4, and 5, but not in newly authorized programs (rating A) or elite ones (6 and 7).

Contextualizing Gender Disparities in Brazilian Higher Education

Brazil's higher education landscape has seen remarkable growth, with women comprising the majority of undergraduate psychology students—often over 70% in recent years. Yet, this parity fades at faculty levels, mirroring global trends but amplified by local factors like reproductive labor burdens and evaluation pressures.

In psychology specifically, women face 'scissor effects'—where initial advantages in entry narrow due to career interruptions for motherhood. A 2021 survey during the pandemic highlighted how gender, race, and parenthood slashed women's productivity, with Brazilian scientists reporting heightened challenges. Recent CAPES quadrienal evaluations (2021-2024), released in January 2026, show progress in program quality, but gender gaps persist in productivity metrics used for funding and promotions.

For instance, while programs like PUCRS Psychology hold CAPES nota 7, lower-tier ones dominate numerically, comprising about 68% at levels 4-5. This distribution means most faculty operate where disparities hit hardest.

Decoding the CAPES Graduate Program Evaluation System

CAPES rates graduate programs on a 1-7 scale (plus A for new authorizations), assessing teaching, research, supervision, and societal impact every four years via the Sucupira platform. Nota 7 signifies international excellence, 5-6 national consolidation, 3-4 good quality, and below that insufficient.

In psychology, the 2021-2024 quadrienio saw gains: many programs climbed, with public universities leading high notes (18.6% nota 6, 13.1% nota 7). Yet, intermediate ratings house the bulk of faculty, where resources and networks may exacerbate gender divides.

Ratings influence funding, attracting talent and shaping career paths. Top programs often have senior women, buffered from early-career pressures.

Detailed Methodology: Rigorous Multilevel Analysis

Researchers scraped 1,527 Lattes CVs from Sucupira lists, deduplicating to 1,482 unique faculty (56% women). Gender was inferred via names (genderBR package, IBGE census) and CV pronouns, with manual checks.

The generalized additive mixed model (GAMM) used Gamma distribution (log link) for skewed scores, random intercepts per program (ICC=23.3%), controlling for years in career (non-linear rise/plateau/decline), master's/PhD supervisions (positive to thresholds), and CAPES rating. Interaction: gender × rating.

Core Results: Where and Why the Gap Persists

Men averaged 59.1 articles (median 42.5) vs. women's 46.4 (36.0); weighted scores 3,463 vs. 2,833. Gap widest in nota 4 (β=-0.451, p<0.001).

• Nota A: No sig. diff.
• Nota 3: Sig. male adv.
• Nota 4-5: Largest gaps.
• Nota 6-7: Parity (women more senior: 21+ years post-PhD vs. 13-20 in lower).

Exploratory ANOVA: Women's career stage varies by rating (F=21.41, p<0.001), linking to childcare peaks (ages 30-40).

Implications for Brazilian Universities and Faculty

Lower/mid-tier programs, prevalent in regional universities, amplify inequalities via fewer resources and heavier teaching loads. Elite programs like USP or UFRJ psych (often 6-7) foster equity through mentorship and funding.

Stakeholders: CAPES could weight maternity leaves; unis offer childcare. For aspiring psych academics, targeting high-rated programs aids equity.Craft a strong academic CV for Brazilian opportunities.

Broader Perspectives: Comparisons and Challenges

Similar to economics (gender gaps in admissions/eval) or physics (24% women faculty), psych shows field-specific patterns. Globally, motherhood penalty ~20% productivity drop; Brazil's aligns but moderated by institutions.

Recent G1 report: Women hyper-productive yet penalized, with 35% CNPq productivity grants vs. men.

Solutions and Actionable Insights for Equity

• Targeted funding for early-career women (e.g., maternity research grants).
• Mentorship in mid-tier programs to boost output.
• CAPES reforms: Gender-disaggregated metrics, parental leave adjustments.
• Unis: Flexible supervision, on-site childcare.

Explore Rate My Professor for psych faculty insights or higher ed jobs in Brazil.

Future Outlook: Trends and Research Directions

With CAPES 2025 quadrienio looming, expect scrutiny on equity. Longitudinal studies on parenthood needed. Positive: Rising nota 5+ programs (21% growth nationally).

For career builders, high-rated programs offer parity; check Brazil university jobs.

Photo by Fotos on Unsplash

Navigating Opportunities in Brazilian Psychology Academia

Whether faculty or applicant, leverage resources like university jobs and career advice. Top programs prioritize balanced teams; mid-tier ones innovate for retention.

Engage via comments below—share experiences!