Women in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape

Heterosis in COMT Val158Met Polymorphism Contributes to Sex-Differences in Children's Math Anxiety

Math anxiety (MA) is a phobic reaction to math activities, potentially impairing math achievement. Higher frequency of MA in females is explainable by the interaction between genetic and environmental factors. The molecular-genetic basis of MA has not been investigated. The COMT Val158Met polymorphism, which affects dopamine levels in the prefrontal cortex, has been associated with anxiety manifestations. The valine allele is associated with lower, and the methionine allele with higher, dopamine availability. In the present study, the effects of sex and COMT Val158Met genotypes on MA were investigated: 389 school children aged 7-12 years were assessed for intelligence, numerical estimation, arithmetic achievement and MA and genotyped for COMT Val158Met polymorphism. The Math Anxiety Questionnaire (MAQ) was used to assess the cognitive and affective components of MA. All genotype groups of boys and girls were comparable regarding genotype frequency, age, school grade, numerical estimation, and arithmetic abilities. We compared the results of all possible genetic models: codominance (Val/Val vs. Val/Met vs. Met/Met), heterosis (Val/Met vs. Val/Val plus Met/Met), valine dominance (Val/Val plus Val/Met vs. Met/Met), and methionine dominance (Met/Met plus Val/Met vs. Val/Val). Models were compared using AIC and AIC weights. No significant differences between girls and boys and no effects of the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on numerical estimation and arithmetic achievement were observed. Sex by genotype effects were significant for intelligence and MA. Intelligence scores were higher in Met/Met girls than in girls with at least one valine allele (valine dominance model). The best fitting model for MA was heterosis. In Anxiety Toward Mathematics, heterozygous individuals presented MA levels close to the grand average regardless of sex. Homozygous boys were significantly less and homozygous girls significantly more math anxious. Heterosis has been seldom explored, but in recent years has emerged as the best genetic model for some phenotypes associated with the COMT Val158Met polymorphism. This is the first study to investigate the genetic-molecular basis of MA.

Traditional Gender Role Beliefs and Career Attainment in STEM: A Gendered Story?

Gender role beliefs (i.e., beliefs about gender-specific responsibilities) predict one's educational and occupational aspirations and choices (Eccles et al., 1983; Schoon and Parsons, 2002). Focusing on STEM careers, we aim to examine the extent to which traditional work/family related gender role beliefs (TGRB) in adolescence predict within and across gender differences in subsequent educational and STEM occupational attainment in adulthood. Using longitudinal data from the Michigan Study of Adolescent and Adult Life Transitions (N = 744; 58% female), participants' educational attainment and their occupations were assessed at age 42. Their occupations were then categorized into three categories: traditional STEM-related careers in the physical sciences, mathematics, engineering, and technology (PMET); life sciences (e.g., health sciences, LS); and non-STEM. For females, TGRB at age 16/18 significantly predicted lower educational attainment as well as a lower likelihood to be in PMET-related occupations in comparison to non-STEM occupations - controlling for their own educational attainment. TGRB also predicted a higher likelihood to be in LS-related in comparison to PMET-related occupations. No significant associations were found for males. However, patterns of findings for males were similar to those of females. TGRB also mediated across gender differences in educational and PMET-related occupational attainment. Findings reveal TGRB to be one underlying psychological factor influencing gender disparity in educational and STEM occupational attainment.

What Is Gender Equality in Science?

Why do inequalities persist between male and female scientists, when the causes are well-researched and widely condemned? In part, because equality has many dimensions. Presenting eight definitions of gender equality, we show each is important but incomplete. Rigid application of any single equality indicator can therefore have perverse outcomes.

Who shines most among the brightest?: A 25-year longitudinal study of elite STEM graduate students

In 1992, the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) surveyed 714 first- and second-year graduate students (48.5% female) attending U.S. universities ranked in the top-15 by science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) field. This study investigated whether individual differences assessed early in their graduate school career were associated with becoming a STEM leader 25 years later (e.g., STEM full professors at research-intensive universities, STEM CEOs, and STEM leaders in government) versus not becoming a STEM leader. We also studied whether there were any important gender differences in relation to STEM leadership. For both men and women, small to medium effect size differences in interests, values, and personality distinguished STEM leaders from nonleaders. Lifestyle and work preferences also distinguished STEM leaders who were more exclusively career-focused and preferred to work-and did work-more hours than nonleaders. Also, there were small to large gender differences in abilities, interests, and lifestyle preferences. Men had more intense interests in STEM and were more career-focused. Women had more diverse educational and occupational interests, and they were more interested in activities outside of work. Early in graduate school, therefore, there are signs that predict who will become a STEM leader-even among elite STEM graduate students. Given the many ways in which STEM leadership can be achieved, the gender differences uncovered within this high-potential sample suggest that men and women are likely to assign different priorities to these opportunities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Unclogging the pipeline: advancement to full professor in academic STEM

Purpose

Women remain underrepresented in academic STEM, especially at the highest ranks. While much attention has focused on early-career attrition, mid-career advancement is still largely understudied and undocumented. The purpose of this paper is to analyze gender differences in advancement to full professor within academic STEM at a mid-size public doctoral university in the western USA, before and after the National Science Foundation (NSF)-ADVANCE Program (2003–2008).

Design/methodology/approach

Using faculty demographics and promotion data between 2008 and 2014, combined with faculty responses to two waves of a climate survey, the magnitude and longevity of the impact of ADVANCE on mid-career faculty advancement across gender is evaluated.

Findings

This study documents increased representation of women in all ranks within the STEM colleges, including that of full professor due to ADVANCE efforts. It also demonstrates the role of greater gender awareness and formalization of procedures in reducing the variability in the time as associate professor until promotion to full professor for all faculty members, while also shrinking gender disparities in career attainment. As a result of the codification of the post-tenure review timeline toward promotion, more recently hired faculty are promoted more swiftly and consistently, irrespective of gender. Post-ADVANCE, both male and female faculty members express a greater understanding of and confidence in the promotion process and no longer see it as either a hurdle or source of gender inequality in upward career mobility.

Research limitations/implications

While data were collected at a single university, demographics and career experiences by women mirror those at other research universities. This study shows that within a given institution-specific governance structure, long-lasting effects on faculty career trajectories can be achieved, by focusing efforts on creating greater transparency in expectations and necessary steps toward promotion, by reducing barriers to information flown, by standardizing and codifying the promotion process, and by actively engaging administrators as collaborators and change agents in the transformation process.

Originality/value

This study addresses mid-career dynamics and potential mechanisms that explain gender gaps in the promotion to full professor, a largely understudied aspect of gender disparities in career attainment within STEM. It shows how institutional policy changes, intended to alleviate gender disparities, can benefit the career trajectories of all faculty members. Specifically, this study highlights the crucial role of codifying procedures and responsibilities in neutralizing subjectivity and inconsistencies in promotion outcomes due to varying departmental climates.

The role of education, occupational match on job satisfaction in the behavioral and social science workforce

While many studies that have been conducted in recent years examining the education and workforce outcomes of STEM graduates, few have focused on the behavioral and social sciences (BSS). Federal agencies, such as National Institutes of Health (NIH), are implementing policies to foster multidisciplinary research in an effort to find more effective solutions to complex problems. As a result, there is growing interest in the career pathways of BSS scientists. This study seeks to increase our understanding of how BSS graduates, particularly women and underrepresented minorities, transition to employment within their respective fields. The focus of this research is the impact of horizontal mismatch, defined as the misalignment between a worker's degree and occupational fields, on job satisfaction and wage outcomes. This analysis of returns to education when mismatch occurs, including a comparison among majors and various demographic groups, provides insights into the labor market experiences of these scientists. Mismatched graduates were found to be much more vulnerable, earning less, and having lower job satisfaction, than their counterparts employed in jobs that aligned with their field of study. Additional job-related training was found to have a positive influence on these outcomes. Also of interest in this study were variations in wage penalties and job satisfaction between groups having different gender and race diversity characteristics. These findings are useful to human resource development (HRD) professionals, governmental policymakers, and other stakeholders seeking strategies to improve the workforce outcomes of BSS scientists.

Heterarchical social organizations and relational models: Understanding gender biases in psychological science

In the present study, we sought to explain changes in the proportion of men and women working within North American psychological science in terms of a heterarchical social organization defined by norms and conventions of society, the structure of higher-education institutions, as well as scientific communities. Using archival records from psychology within the U.S., we found that the demographic shift from male-dominated to female-dominated reflects an asymptotic relationship that has been established in the last two decades. An examination of three potential indicators of status (PhD department appointments, general science awards, and scientific awards in psychology) did not indicate a similar trend compared to the ascension of women within psychological science. We believe that this reflects a heterarchical structure: disparate criteria were used to assign women’s status in the social networks of academic institutions and scientific research. Moreover, we also claim that the increase in the number of women and “female-associated” topics has resulted in a general change in the status of psychology.

STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes

An important goal of the scientific community is broadening the achievement and participation of racial minorities in STEM fields. Yet, professors' beliefs about the fixedness of ability may be an unwitting and overlooked barrier for stigmatized students. Results from a longitudinal university-wide sample (150 STEM professors and more than 15,000 students) revealed that the racial achievement gaps in courses taught by more fixed mindset faculty were twice as large as the achievement gaps in courses taught by more growth mindset faculty. Course evaluations revealed that students were demotivated and had more negative experiences in classes taught by fixed (versus growth) mindset faculty. Faculty mindset beliefs predicted student achievement and motivation above and beyond any other faculty characteristic, including their gender, race/ethnicity, age, teaching experience, or tenure status. These findings suggest that faculty mindset beliefs have important implications for the classroom experiences and achievement of underrepresented minority students in STEM.

Psychological Constellations Assessed at Age 13 Predict Distinct Forms of Eminence 35 Years Later

This investigation examined whether math/scientific and verbal/humanistic ability and preference constellations, developed on intellectually talented 13-year-olds to predict their educational outcomes at age 23, continue to maintain their longitudinal potency by distinguishing distinct forms of eminence 35 years later. Eminent individuals were defined as those who, by age 50, had accomplished something rare: creative and highly impactful careers (e.g., full professors at research-intensive universities, Fortune 500 executives, distinguished judges and lawyers, leaders in biomedicine, award-winning journalists and writers). Study 1 consisted of 677 intellectually precocious youths, assessed at age 13, whose leadership and creative accomplishments were assessed 35 years later. Study 2 constituted a constructive replication-an analysis of 605 top science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) graduate students, assessed on the same predictor constructs early in graduate school and assessed again 25 years later. In both samples, the same ability and preference parameter values, which defined math/scientific versus verbal/humanistic constellations, discriminated participants who ultimately achieved distinct forms of eminence from their peers pursuing other life endeavors.

STEM/Non-STEM Divide Structures Undergraduate Beliefs About Gender and Talent in Academia

Research and popular debate on female underrepresentation in academia has focused on STEM fields. But recent work has offered a unifying explanation for gender representation across the STEM/non-STEM divide. This proposed explanation, called the field-specific ability beliefs (FAB) hypothesis, postulates that, in combination with pervasive stereotypes that link men but not women with intellectual talent, academics perpetuate female underrepresentation by transmitting to students in earlier stages of education their beliefs about how much intellectual talent is required for success in each academic field. This theory was supported by a nationwide survey of U.S. academics that showed both STEM and non-STEM fields with fewer women are also the fields that academics believe require more brilliance. We test this top-down schema with a nationwide survey of U.S. undergraduates, assessing the extent to which undergraduate beliefs about talent in academia mirror those of academics. We find no evidence that academics transmit their beliefs to undergraduates. We also use a second survey "identical to the first but with each field's gender ratio provided as added information" to explicitly test the relationship between undergraduate beliefs about gender and talent in academia. The results for this second survey suggest that the extent to which undergraduates rate brilliance as essential to success in an academic field is highly sensitive to this added information for non-STEM fields, but not STEM fields. Overall, our study offers evidence that, contrary to FAB hypothesis, the STEM/non-STEM divide principally shapes undergraduate beliefs about both gender and talent in academia.

Patterns of authorship in ecology and evolution: First, last, and corresponding authorship vary with gender and geography

The position of an author on the byline of a paper affects the inferences readers make about their contributions to the research. We examine gender differences in authorship in the ecology literature using two datasets: submissions to six journals between 2010 and 2015 (regardless of whether they were accepted), and manuscripts published by 151 journals between 2009 and 2015. Women were less likely to be last (i.e., "senior") authors (averaging ~23% across journals, years, and datasets) and sole authors (~24%), but more likely to be first author (~38%), relative to their overall frequency of authorship (~31%). However, the proportion of women in all authorship roles, except sole authorship, has increased year-on-year. Women were less likely to be authors on papers with male last authors, and all-male papers were more abundant than expected given the overall gender ratio. Women were equally well represented on papers published in higher versus lower impact factor journals at all authorship positions. Female first authors were less likely to serve as corresponding author of their papers; this difference increased with the degree of gender inequality in the author's home country, but did not depend on the gender of the last author. First authors from non-English-speaking countries were less likely to serve as corresponding author of their papers, especially if the last author was from an English-speaking country. That women more often delegate corresponding authorship to one of their coauthors may increase the likelihood that readers undervalue their role in the research by shifting credit for their contributions to coauthors. We suggest that author contribution statements be more universally adopted and that these statements declare how and/or why the corresponding author was selected for this role.

Progress and Prospects in Gender Visibility at SMBE Annual Meetings

Reduced visibility of women in science is thought to be one of the causes of their underrepresentation among scientists, in particular at senior positions. Visibility is achieved through publications, and through conference attendance and presentations. Here, we investigated gender differences in visibility at the annual meetings of the Society of Molecular Biology and Evolution. The analysis of meeting programs showed a regular increase in female speakers for the last 16 years. Data on abstract submission suggest that there are no gender-related preferences in the acceptance of contributed presentations at the most recent meetings. However, data collected on-site in 2015 and 2016 show that women asked only ∼25% of the questions, that is, much less than expected given the female attendance. Understanding the reasons for this pattern is necessary for the development of policies that aim to reduce imbalance in visibility.

Women's visibility in academic seminars: Women ask fewer questions than men

The attrition of women in academic careers is a major concern, particularly in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics subjects. One factor that can contribute to the attrition is the lack of visible role models for women in academia. At early career stages, the behaviour of the local community may play a formative role in identifying ingroup role models, shaping women’s impressions of whether or not they can be successful in academia. One common and formative setting to observe role models is the local departmental academic seminar, talk, or presentation. We thus quantified women’s visibility through the question-asking behaviour of academics at seminars using observations and an online survey. From the survey responses of over 600 academics in 20 countries, we found that women reported asking fewer questions after seminars compared to men. This impression was supported by observational data from almost 250 seminars in 10 countries: women audience members asked absolutely and proportionally fewer questions than male audience members. When asked why they did not ask questions when they wanted to, women, more than men, endorsed internal factors (e.g., not working up the nerve). However, our observations suggest that structural factors might also play a role; when a man was the first to ask a question, or there were fewer questions, women asked proportionally fewer questions. Attempts to counteract the latter effect by manipulating the time for questions (in an effort to provoke more questions) in two departments were unsuccessful. We propose alternative recommendations for creating an environment that makes everyone feel more comfortable to ask questions, thus promoting equal visibility for women and members of other less visible groups.

Self-citation is the hallmark of productive authors, of any gender

It was recently reported that men self-cite >50% more often than women across a wide variety of disciplines in the bibliographic database JSTOR. Here, we replicate this finding in a sample of 1.6 million papers from Author-ity, a version of PubMed with computationally disambiguated author names. More importantly, we show that the gender effect largely disappears when accounting for prior publication count in a multidimensional statistical model. Gender has the weakest effect on the probability of self-citation among an extensive set of features tested, including byline position, affiliation, ethnicity, collaboration size, time lag, subject-matter novelty, reference/citation counts, publication type, language, and venue. We find that self-citation is the hallmark of productive authors, of any gender, who cite their novel journal publications early and in similar venues, and more often cross citation-barriers such as language and indexing. As a result, papers by authors with short, disrupted, or diverse careers miss out on the initial boost in visibility gained from self-citations. Our data further suggest that this disproportionately affects women because of attrition and not because of disciplinary under-specialization.

Family and the field: Expectations of a field-based research career affect researcher family planning decisions

Field-based data collection provides an extraordinary opportunity for comparative research. However, the demands of pursuing research away from home creates an expectation of unburdened individuals who have the temporal, financial, and social resources to conduct this work. Here we examine whether this myth of the socially unencumbered scholar contributes to the loss of professionals and trainees. To investigate this, we conducted an internet-based survey of professional and graduate student anthropologists (n = 1025) focused on the challenges and barriers associated with developing and maintaining a fieldwork-oriented career path and an active family life. This study sought to determine how (1) family socioeconomic status impacts becoming an anthropologist, (2) expectations of field-based research influence family planning, and (3) fieldwork experiences influence perceptions of family-career balance and stress. We found that most anthropologists and anthropology students come from educated households and that white men were significantly more likely to become tenured professionals than other demographic groups. The gender disparity is striking because a larger number of women are trained in anthropology and were more likely than men to report delaying parenthood to pursue their career. Furthermore, regardless of socioeconomic background, anthropologists reported significant lack of family-career balance and high stress associated with the profession. For professionals, lack of balance was most associated with gender, age, SES, tenure, and impacts of parenting on their career, while for students it was ethnicity, relative degree speed, graduate funding, employment status, total research conducted, career impact on family planning, and concern with tenure (p < .05). Anthropology bridges the sciences and humanities, making it the ideal discipline to initiate discussions on the embedded structural components of field-based careers generalizable across specialties.

Can lifestyle preferences help explain the persistent gender gap in academia? The "mothers work less" hypothesis supported for German but not for U.S. early career researchers

Do lifestyle preferences contribute to the remaining gender gap in higher positions in academia with highly qualified women—especially those with children—deliberately working fewer hours than men do? We tested the “mothers work less” hypothesis in two samples of early career researchers employed at universities in Germany (N = 202) and in the US (N = 197). Early career researchers in the US worked on average 6.3 hours more per week than researchers in Germany. In Germany, female early career researchers with children had drastically reduced work hours (around 8 hours per week) compared to male researchers with children and compared to female researchers without children, whereas we found no such effect for U.S. researchers. In addition, we asked how long respondents would ideally want to work (ideal work hours), and results revealed similar effects for ideal work hours. Results support the “mothers work less” hypothesis for German but not for U.S. early career researchers.

Gender differences in authorships are not associated with publication bias in an evolutionary journal

The loss of talented women from senior academic positions has partly resulted from a lower number of published papers and the accompanying reduced visibility of female compared to male scientists. The reasons for these gender-differences in authorship is unclear. One potential reason is a bias in the editorial and review process of scientific journals. We investigated whether patterns of authorship and editorial outcome were biased according to gender and geographic location in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology. Such potential bias may contribute to inequality in the field. We found patterns of gender differences in authorship, but this was unrelated to the editorial decision of whether to publish the manuscript. Female first-authors (the lead role) were six times less likely to be named as the corresponding author than male first-authors, and female first-authors were more likely to be displaced as corresponding authors by female co-authors than were male first-authors. We found an under-representation of female first- and last-authors compared to baseline populations of members of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology (which publishes the Journal of Evolutionary Biology) and of Evolutionary Biology faculty at the world top-10 universities for the Life Sciences. Also, manuscripts from Asia were five times more likely to be rejected on the final decision, independent of gender. Overall our results suggest that the peer review processes we investigated at the Journal of Evolutionary Biology are predominately gender-neutral, but not neutral to geographic location. Editorial gender-bias is thus unlikely to be a contributing factor to differences in authorship in this journal.

Gender Inequity during the Ph.D.: Females in the Life Sciences Benefit Less from Their Integration into the Scientific Community

Female researchers remain underrepresented in higher academic ranks, even within female-dominated fields, such as the life sciences. The phenomenon is often attributed to women’s lower publication productivity. The current article explores gender differences with respect to integration into the scientific community, pursued tasks during the Ph.D. (e.g., teaching and research), and publication productivity in the life sciences. Moreover, it explores how these variables relate to the intention of pursuing an academic research career. Survey data with recent Ph.D. graduates from the life sciences in Germany (N = 736) were analyzed through descriptive and multivariate analysis. Females had fewer publications as lead author (1.4 vs. 1.9, p = 0.05). There were no differences in pursued tasks, perceived integration into the scientific community, and co-authorship. However, Ph.D. characteristics affected females and males differently. Only male Ph.D. graduates benefited from being integrated into their scientific community by an increase in lead author publications. In contrast to male Ph.D. graduates, women’s academic career intentions were significantly affected by their integration into the scientific community and co-authorship. Results suggest that women may benefit less from their integration into the scientific community and may ascribe more importance to networks for their career progress.

Bailey A, Handelsman J. Increasing the perceived malleability of gender bias using a modified Video Intervention for Diversity in STEM (VIDS)

Scholars are increasingly responding to calls for interventions to address persistent gender disparities in the sciences. Yet, interventions that emphasize the pervasiveness of bias may inadvertently damage efficacy to confront sexism by creating the perception that bias is immutable. We examined this possibility in the context of a successful bias literacy program, Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM (VIDS; Moss-Racusin et al., in press). In two studies with working adults from the general public ( N = 343) and science faculty ( N = 149), we modified VIDS by developing a module (UNITE) that offers tools for addressing bias and promotes the mindset that bias is malleable. VIDS alone was sufficient to increase awareness of bias, reduce sexism, and improve bias identification. However, UNITE buffered against perceptions that bias is immutable and restored self-efficacy to address bias. We conclude that interventions must aim not only to increase bias literacy but also offer concrete tools and avoid implying that these problems are insurmountable.

How Are We Doing? An Examination of Gender Representation in Industrial and Organizational (I-O) Psychology

There has been an explosion of within-profession studies examining standings on gender representation in advancement, publication patterns, and conference presentations. However, industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology has yet to take such an introspective look and fully join these conversations. This manuscript aims to initiate and encourage such discussion. Through a brief review of relevant background information and the collection and analysis of recent archival data, we seek to examine where we have been with regard to gender representation, where we currently stand, and what steps are needed moving forward. We aim to stimulate continued examinations on this topic while recommending appropriate action items relevant to achieving equity in representation in our field.

Repairing the Leaky Pipeline: A Motivationally Supportive Intervention to Enhance Persistence in Undergraduate Science Pathways

The current study reports on the efficacy of a multi-faceted motivationally designed undergraduate enrichment summer program for supporting science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) persistence. Structural equation modeling was used to compare summer program participants (n = 186), who participated in the program between their first and second years in college, to a propensity score matched comparison sample (n = 401). Participation in the summer program positively predicted science motivation (self-efficacy, task value), assessed eight months after the end of the program (second year in college). The summer enrichment program was also beneficial for science persistence variables, as evidenced by significant direct and indirect effects of the program on science course completion during students' third year of college and students' intentions to pursue a science research career assessed during the third year of college. In general, the program was equally beneficial for all participants, but ancillary analyses indicated added benefits with respect to task value for students with relatively lower prior science achievement during the first year of college and with respect to subsequent science course taking for males. Implications for developing effective interventions to reduce the flow of individuals out of STEM fields and for translating motivational theory into practice are discussed.

How to Make Psychology a Genuine Science of Behavior: Comment on Dolinski’s Thoughtful Paper

In this comment to Doliński’s (2018, this issue) challenging paper, I express my agreement with his basic ideas and with his concerns about the alienation of social psychology. However, I also present some critical thoughts that amount to a slightly different diagnosis of the present situation. Rather than concluding that our discipline has ceased to study real behaviors, I provide positive counter-examples of substantial behavioral science and argue that the major problem is not to distinguish between measures of “real” and “non-real” behaviors. The problem core, rather, lies in the widespread tendency to mistake statistical and technical indices (latencies, model parameters, fMRI indices, etc.) for measures of meaningful behavior. When technical means become ends in themselves, Doliński’s metaphor applies that “the tail wags the dog”.

Gendered Language on the Economics Job Market Rumors Forum

This paper examines the existence of an unwelcoming or stereotypical culture using evidence on how women and men are portrayed in anonymous discussions on the Economics Job Market Rumors forum (EJMR). I use a Lasso-Logistic model to measure gendered language in EJMR postings, identifying the words that are most strongly associated with discussions about one gender or the other. I find that the words most predictive of a post about a woman are typically about physical appearance or personal information, whereas those most predictive of a post about a man tend to focus on academic or professional characteristics.

A systematic analysis of UK cancer research funding by gender of primary investigator

OBJECTIVES

To categorically describe cancer research funding in the UK by gender of primary investigator (PIs).

DESIGN

Systematic analysis of all open-access data.

METHODS

Data about public and philanthropic cancer research funding awarded to UK institutions between 2000 and 2013 were obtained from several sources. Fold differences were used to compare total investment, award number, mean and median award value between male and female PIs. Mann-Whitney U tests were performed to determine statistically significant associations between PI gender and median grant value.

RESULTS

Of the studies included in our analysis, 2890 (69%) grants with a total value of £1.82 billion (78%) were awarded to male PIs compared with 1296 (31%) grants with a total value of £512 million (22%) awarded to female PIs. Male PIs received 1.3 times the median award value of their female counterparts (P<0.001). These apparent absolute and relative differences largely persisted regardless of subanalyses.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate substantial differences in cancer research investment awarded by gender. Female PIs clearly and consistently receive less funding than their male counterparts in terms of total investment, the number of funded awards, mean funding awarded and median funding awarded.

Gender inequity in speaking opportunities at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting

Implicit and explicit biases impede the participation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematic (STEM) fields. Across career stages, attending conferences and presenting research are ways to spread scientific results, find job opportunities, and gain awards. Here, we present an analysis by gender of the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting speaking opportunities from 2014 to 2016. We find that women were invited and assigned oral presentations less often than men. However, when we control for career stage, we see similar rates between women and men and women sometimes outperform men. At the same time, women elect for poster presentations more than men. Male primary conveners allocate invited abstracts and oral presentations to women less often and below the proportion of women authors. These results highlight the need to provide equal opportunity to women in speaking roles at scientific conferences as part of the overall effort to advance women in STEM.

The Development of Children's Gender-Science Stereotypes: A Meta-analysis of 5 Decades of U.S. Draw-A-Scientist Studies

This meta-analysis, spanning 5 decades of Draw-A-Scientist studies, examined U.S. children's gender-science stereotypes linking science with men. These stereotypes should have weakened over time because women's representation in science has risen substantially in the United States, and mass media increasingly depict female scientists. Based on 78 studies (N = 20,860; grades K-12), children's drawings of scientists depicted female scientists more often in later decades, but less often among older children. Children's depictions of scientists therefore have become more gender diverse over time, but children still associate science with men as they grow older. These results may reflect that children observe more male than female scientists in their environments, even though women's representation in science has increased over time.

Science Possible Selves and the Desire to be a Scientist: Mindsets, Gender Bias, and Confidence during Early Adolescence

In the United States, gender gaps in science interest widen during the middle school years. Recent research on adults shows that gender gaps in some academic fields are associated with mindsets about ability and gender-science biases. In a sample of 529 students in a U.S. middle school, we assess how explicit boy-science bias, science confidence, science possible self (belief in being able to become a scientist), and desire to be a scientist vary by gender. Guided by theories and prior research, we use a series of multivariate logistic regression models to examine the relationships between mindsets about ability and these variables. We control for self-reported science grades, social capital, and race/ethnic minority status. Results show that seeing academic ability as innate (“fixed mindsets”) is associated with boy-science bias, and that younger girls have less boy-science bias than older girls. Fixed mindsets and boy-science bias are both negatively associated with a science possible self; science confidence is positively associated with a science possible self. In the final model, high science confident and having a science possible self are positively associated with a desire to be a scientist. Facilitating growth mindsets and countering boy-science bias in middle school may be fruitful interventions for widening participation in science careers.

The Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

The underrepresentation of girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields is a continual concern for social scientists and policymakers. Using an international database on adolescent achievement in science, mathematics, and reading ( N = 472,242), we showed that girls performed similarly to or better than boys in science in two of every three countries, and in nearly all countries, more girls appeared capable of college-level STEM study than had enrolled. Paradoxically, the sex differences in the magnitude of relative academic strengths and pursuit of STEM degrees rose with increases in national gender equality. The gap between boys’ science achievement and girls’ reading achievement relative to their mean academic performance was near universal. These sex differences in academic strengths and attitudes toward science correlated with the STEM graduation gap. A mediation analysis suggested that life-quality pressures in less gender-equal countries promote girls’ and women’s engagement with STEM subjects.

Gender disparities in colloquium speakers at top universities

Colloquium talks at prestigious universities both create and reflect academic researchers' reputations. Gender disparities in colloquium talks can arise through a variety of mechanisms. The current study examines gender differences in colloquium speakers at 50 prestigious US colleges and universities in 2013-2014. Using archival data, we analyzed 3,652 talks in six academic disciplines. Men were more likely than women to be colloquium speakers even after controlling for the gender and rank of the available speakers. Eliminating alternative explanations (e.g., women declining invitations more often than men), our follow-up data revealed that female and male faculty at top universities reported no differences in the extent to which they (i) valued and (ii) turned down speaking engagements. Additional data revealed that the presence of women as colloquium chairs (and potentially on colloquium committees) increased the likelihood of women appearing as colloquium speakers. Our data suggest that those who invite and schedule speakers serve as gender gatekeepers with the power to create or reduce gender differences in academic reputations.

Gender Diversity in a STEM Subfield - Analysis of a Large Scientific Society and Its Annual Conferences

Speaking engagements, serving as session chairs, and receiving awards at national meetings are essential stepping stones towards professional success for scientific researchers. Studies of gender parity in meetings of national scientific societies repeatedly uncover bias in speaker selection, engendering underrepresentation of women among featured presenters. To continue this dialogue, we analyzed membership data and annual conference programs of a large scientific society (>7000 members annually) in a male-rich (~70% males), technology-oriented STEM subfield. We detected a pronounced skew towards males among invited keynote lecturers, plenary speakers, and recipients of the society's Senior Investigator award (15%, 13%, and 8% females, respectively). However, the proportion of females among Mid-Career and Young Investigator award recipients and oral session chairs resembled the current gender distribution of the general membership. Female members were more likely to present at the conferences and equally likely to apply and be accepted for oral presentations as their male counterparts. The gender of a session chair had no effect on the gender distribution of selected applicants. Interestingly, we identified several research subareas that were naturally enriched (i.e., not influenced by unequal selection of presenters) for either female or male participants, illustrating within a single subfield the gender divide along biology-technology line typical of all STEM disciplines. Two female-enriched topics experienced a rapid growth in popularity within the examined period, more than doubling the number of associated researchers. Collectively, these findings contribute to the contemporary discourse on gender in science and hopefully will propel positive changes within this and other societies. Graphical abstract ᅟ.