Intersectional inequalities in science

Status bias in Chinese scholarly publishing: an exploratory study based on mixed methods

The academic community requires not only responsible research but also responsible academic journals. An exploratory study of Chinese-language academic journals that used mixed methods found Chinese-language academic journals on the humanities and social sciences exhibiting a widespread status bias. Most of them summarily rejected submissions from junior researchers and students without paying due attention to the quality of the research itself. The main reasons for this problem are editorial department resources, the scientific research evaluation system, the editorial department culture, and the wider academic environment. This study recommends that Chinese-language academic journals join the Committee on Publication Ethics, other publishing ethics organizations, and the "Responsible Journals" program as soon as possible.

Gendered hiring and attrition on the path to parity for academic faculty

Despite long-running efforts to increase gender diversity among tenured and tenure-track faculty in the U.S., women remain underrepresented in most academic fields, sometimes dramatically so. Here, we quantify the relative importance of faculty hiring and faculty attrition for both past and future faculty gender diversity using comprehensive data on the training and employment of 268,769 tenured and tenure-track faculty rostered at 12,112U.S. PhD-granting departments, spanning 111 academic fields between 2011 and 2020. Over this time, we find that hiring had a far greater impact on women's representation among faculty than attrition in the majority (90.1%) of academic fields, even as academia loses a higher share of women faculty relative to men at every career stage. Finally, we model the impact of five specific policy interventions on women's representation, and project that eliminating attrition differences between women and men only leads to a marginal increase in women's overall representation-in most fields, successful interventions will need to make substantial and sustained changes to hiring in order to reach gender parity.

"Ethical Responsibility Very Often Gets Drowned Out": A Qualitative Interview Study of Genome Scientists' and ELSI Scholars' Perspectives on the Role and Relevance of ELSI Expertise

BACKGROUND

Genome scientists and Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of genetics (ELSI) scholars commonly inhabit distinct research cultures - utilizing different research methods, asking different research questions, and valuing different types of knowledge. Collaborations between these two communities are frequently called for to enhance the ethical conduct of genomics research. Yet, little has been done to qualitatively compare genome scientists' and ELSI scholars' perspectives on collaborations with each other and the factors that may affect these collaborations.

METHODS

20 semi-structured interviews with US-based genome scientists and ELSI scholars were conducted between June-September 2021. Interviews were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Genome scientists and ELSI scholars provided different understandings of the value and goals of their collaborations with each other. Genome scientists largely perceived ELSI expertise to be relevant for human subjects research; they described ELSI scholars as communicators who help the public and/or study participants better understand genomics research. In comparison, ELSI scholars viewed themselves as developing and implementing policies; they expressed frustration at how scientists can misunderstand their research methods or negatively perceive them. A combination of factors - both structural (e.g., criteria for promotion) and cultural (e.g., perceptions of what colleagues value and respect) - seemed to shape these diverging perspectives.

CONCLUSION

Academic institutions, funders, and researchers commonly call for collaborations between genome scientists and ELSI scholars, but under-consider how their different conceptual frameworks, research methods, goals, norms, and values, conjoin to affect such partnerships. Acknowledging, exploring, and addressing the complex interplay between these factors could help to more effectively facilitate collaborations between genome scientists and ELSI scholars.

Using Bibliometric Data to Define and Understand Publishing Network Equity in Anesthesiology

BACKGROUND

Anesthesiology departments and professional organizations increasingly recognize the need to embrace diverse membership to effectively care for patients, to educate our trainees, and to contribute to innovative research. 1 Bibliometric analysis uses citation data to determine the patterns of interrelatedness within a scientific community. Social network analysis examines these patterns to elucidate the network's functional properties. Using these methodologies, an analysis of contemporary scholarly work was undertaken to outline network structure and function, with particular focus on the equity of node and graph-level connectivity patterns.

METHODS

Using the Web of Science, this study examines bibliographic data from 6 anesthesiology-specific journals between January 1, 2017, and August 26, 2022. The final data represent 4453 articles, 19,916 independent authors, and 4436 institutions. Analysis of coauthorship was performed using R libraries software. Collaboration patterns were assessed at the node and graph level to analyze patterns of coauthorship. Influential authors and institutions were identified using centrality metrics; author influence was also cataloged by the number of publications and highly cited papers. Independent assessors reviewed influential author photographs to classify race and gender. The Gini coefficient was applied to examine dispersion of influence across nodes. Pearson correlations were used to investigate the relationship between centrality metrics, number of publications, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding.

RESULTS

The modularity of the author network is significantly higher than would be predicted by chance (0.886 vs random network mean 0.340, P < .01), signifying strong community formation. The Gini coefficient indicates inequity across both author and institution centrality metrics, representing moderate to high disparity in node influence. Identifying the top 30 authors by centrality metrics, number of published and highly cited papers, 79.0% were categorized as male; 68.1% of authors were classified as White (non-Latino) and 24.6% Asian.

CONCLUSIONS

The highly modular network structure indicates dense author communities. Extracommunity cooperation is limited, previously demonstrated to negatively impact novel scientific work. 2 , 3 Inequitable node influence is seen at both author and institution level, notably an imbalance of information transfer and disparity in connectivity patterns. There is an association between network influence, article publication (authors), and NIH funding (institutions). Female and minority authors are inequitably represented among the most influential authors. This baseline bibliometric analysis provides an opportunity to direct future network connections to more inclusively share information and integrate diverse perspectives, properties associated with increased academic productivity. 3 , 4.

"Women's work": Gender and the physician workforce

Historically, the physician professional identity and the organizational structure of Western medicine have been defined by masculine norms such as authority and assertiveness. The past five decades have seen a rapid shift in the demographics of attendees as medical schools, with equal numbers of women and men matriculants for nearly twenty years. Gender as a social, cultural, and structural variable continues to influence the physician workforce. The entry of women into medicine, has had far reaching effects on the expectations of patients, the interactions of physicians with other members of the healthcare team, and the delivery of care. Redefining the culture of medicine to accommodate the diversity of the modern workforce may benefit all physician and improve the delivery of healthcare.

Participant diversity in ACER: 2010-2022

BACKGROUND

Increasing diversity has become a priority for all fields working with human subjects due to historic exclusions and misrepresentations of participants with minoritized identities. To create a more representative and generalizable science of alcohol use, the Research Society on Alcohol (RSA) and its official journal, Alcohol: Clinical and Experimental Research (ACER), have increasingly incorporated diversity and inclusion into their posted values and programming.

METHODS

We analyzed the content of articles published in ACER from 2010 through 2022 (6 years before and after the formation of RSA's Diversity Committee) to assess the reporting of participants' demographic information and whether there has been increased inclusion of diverse samples in alcohol research over time. Our team screened 3292 abstracts for data extraction; studies were included if they were primary analyses of data collected from human subjects (n = 1043).

RESULTS

Reporting of all demographic variables increased over time, with significant increases in reporting for race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, socioeconomic status (SES), income, and educational attainment. Demographic variables were also increasingly used in analyses. However, representation of research outside the United States diminished significantly over time.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide recommended journal article reporting standards for ACER to continue the positive progress in reporting demographics in alcohol research and facilitate meta-analyses examining demographic modulation and the impact of social determinants of health.

Lighting pathways to success in STEM: a virtual Laboratory Meeting Programme (LaMP) mutually benefits mentees and host laboratories

Developing robust professional networks can help shape the trajectories of early career scientists. Yet, historical inequities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields make access to these networks highly variable across academic programmes, and senior academics often have little time for mentoring. Here, we illustrate the success of a virtual Laboratory Meeting Programme (LaMP). In this programme, we matched students (mentees) with a more experienced scientist (mentors) from a research group. The mentees then attended the mentors' laboratory meetings during the academic year with two laboratory meetings specifically dedicated to the mentee's professional development. Survey results indicate that mentees expanded their knowledge of the hidden curriculum as well as their professional network, while only requiring a few extra hours of their mentor's time over eight months. In addition, host laboratories benefitted from mentees sharing new perspectives and knowledge in laboratory meetings. Diversity of the mentees was significantly higher than the mentors, suggesting that the programme increased the participation of traditionally under-represented groups. Finally, we found that providing a stipend was very important to many mentees. We conclude that virtual LaMPs can be an inclusive and cost-effective way to foster trainee development and increase diversity within STEM fields with little additional time commitment.

A memory-theoretic account of citation propagation

Despite the common assumption that citations are indicative of an article's scientific merit, increasing evidence indicates that citation counts are largely driven by variables unrelated to quality. In this article, we treat people's decisions of what to cite as an instance of memory retrieval and show that observed citation patterns are well accounted for by a model of memory. The proposed exposure model anticipates that small alterations in factors that affect people's ability to retrieve to-be-cited articles from memory early in their life cycle are magnified over time and can lead to the emergence of highly cited papers. This effect occurs even when there is no variation in the starting point exposure probabilities (i.e. when assuming a level playing field where all articles are treated equally and of equal 'quality'), and is exacerbated by natural variation in retrievability of articles due to encoding. We discuss the implications of the model within the context of research evaluation and hiring, tenure and promotion decisions.

Monitoring Open Science as transformative change: Towards a systemic framework

Following a flurry of policies for Open Science (OS), there is now a wave of initiatives to monitor its adoption. However, the great diversity of understandings and activities related to Open Science makes monitoring very challenging. There is a danger that by focusing on what can be readily observed (e.g. publications) many other OS activities are overlooked (e.g. participation), with a potential narrowing of OS scope, streetlight effects, and deviation from the values of OS. Since Open Science can be understood as a systemic transformation of the research system, we have borrowed concepts from Transformative Innovation Policies frameworks which aim at evaluating socio-technical transitions. In accordance with this view of OS as a systemic transformation, we propose that the new monitoring efforts should shift towards: (i) systemic perspectives which considers the various actions related to OS, including policies and outputs (e.g. datasets) but also processes (e.g. participatory events), outcomes (e.g. citizen interest in science) and expected impacts (e.g. better scientific contributions to addressing societal problems); (ii) implementation of monitoring as reflexive learning (rather than accountability or benchmarking); (iii) mapping the directionality of the activities and the values associated with the choices in directions. In summary, a monitoring framework for OS requires a profound change in conventional monitoring practices. The scope should broaden from current focus on outputs (such as publications) towards the processes of connection that make science 'open' (usage, co-creation and dialogue), as well as towards outcomes (changes in practices) and the longer-term impacts that reflect the values and normative commitments of OS.

American Black Authorship Has Decreased Across All Clinical Specialties Despite an Increasing Number of Black Physicians Between 1990 and 2020 in the USA

PURPOSE

Many diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives assume that attainment of a racially diverse healthcare workforce will translate to increased diversity elsewhere in the healthcare system (e.g., leadership roles or academic authorship). We sought to investigate these trends over time by examining the evolution of physician demographics in the USA, in concert with demographic changes in US authorship in US medical journals from 1990 to 2020 across 25 specialties.

METHODS

We reviewed all articles indexed in PubMed, with a primary author affiliation located in the USA and limited to journals based in the USA, relative to the proportion of medical professionals in the CMS National Provider Registry. We employed a previously peer-reviewed/validated algorithm called "averaging-of-proportions" that probabilistically predicts racial identity from surname using the US Census to assess the relationship between diversity among medical professionals and diversity in medical journal authorship.

RESULTS

Data reveals a sharp disconnect between the demographic breakdown of physicians and authors. Despite an increase in the number of Black physicians (from 8.5% in 2005 to 9.1% in 2020), there has been a decrease in Black early-career authorship from 7.2% in 1990 to 5.8% in 2020. The percentage of Black early-career authors across all specialties in 2020 is lower than the average per specialty in 1990. Similar trends were noted for Black senior authorship, decreasing from 7.6% in 1990 to 6.2% in 2020, as well as a plateau in Hispanic authorship over the same time interval despite an increasing number of Hispanic physicians.

CONCLUSION

Modest advances in physician diversity have not translated to increased diversity in academic authorship. Increasing diversity requires initiatives focused beyond recruitment of underrepresented minorities to medical schools or residencies.

In Their Own Voices: A Critical Narrative Review of Black Women Faculty Members' First-Person Accounts of Racial Trauma Across Higher Education

Phenomenon: Black women often face more challenges in academic medicine than others and are leaving the profession due to unsupportive work environments, systematic neglect, and experiences of invisibility. Research offers insight into Black women faculty experiences, but studies have largely been conducted on their experiences rather than written by them. We analyzed first-person narratives exploring Black women faculty members' experiences with racial trauma across the academy considering the intersectionality of racism and sexism to lay the foundation for understanding Black women physicians' faculty experiences in similar spaces. Approach: We gathered first-person narratives of Black women faculty members in the U.S. from ERIC, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline. We used a variety of terms to draw out potential experiences with trauma (e.g., microaggressions, stigma, prejudice). Articles were screened by two researchers, with a third resolving conflicts. Drawing on constructs from Black feminist theory, two researchers extracted from each article authors' claims about: (a) their institutions, (b) their experiences in those spaces, and (c) suggestions for change. We then analyzed these data through the lens of racial trauma while also noting the effects of gendered racism. Findings: We identified four key themes from the 46 first-person accounts of racial trauma of Black faculty members in higher education: pressures arising from being "the only" or "one of few"; elimination of value through the "cloak of invisibility" and "unconscious assumptions"; the psychological burden of "walking a tightrope"; and communal responsibility, asking "if not us, then who?" Insights: Black women's narratives are necessary to unearth their specific truths as individuals who experience intersectional oppression because of their marginalized racial and gender identities. This may also assist with better understanding opportunities to dismantle the oppressive structures and practices hindering more diverse, equitable, and inclusive institutional environments where their representation, voice, and experience gives space for them to thrive and not simply survive within the academy, including and not limited to medicine.

Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research

Scientists are enthusiastically imagining ways in which artificial intelligence (AI) tools might improve research. Why are AI tools so attractive and what are the risks of implementing them across the research pipeline? Here we develop a taxonomy of scientists' visions for AI, observing that their appeal comes from promises to improve productivity and objectivity by overcoming human shortcomings. But proposed AI solutions can also exploit our cognitive limitations, making us vulnerable to illusions of understanding in which we believe we understand more about the world than we actually do. Such illusions obscure the scientific community's ability to see the formation of scientific monocultures, in which some types of methods, questions and viewpoints come to dominate alternative approaches, making science less innovative and more vulnerable to errors. The proliferation of AI tools in science risks introducing a phase of scientific enquiry in which we produce more but understand less. By analysing the appeal of these tools, we provide a framework for advancing discussions of responsible knowledge production in the age of AI.

It takes a village: A multi-brain approach to studying multigenerational family communication

Grandparents play a critical role in child rearing across the globe. Yet, there is a shortage of neurobiological research examining the relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren. We employ multi-brain neurocomputational models to simulate how changes in neurophysiological processes in both development and healthy aging affect multigenerational inter-brain coupling - a neural marker that has been linked to a range of socio-emotional and cognitive outcomes. The simulations suggest that grandparent-child interactions may be paired with higher inter-brain coupling than parent-child interactions, raising the possibility that the former may be more advantageous under certain conditions. Critically, this enhancement of inter-brain coupling for grandparent-child interactions is more pronounced in tri-generational interactions that also include a parent, which may speak to findings that grandparent involvement in childrearing is most beneficial if the parent is also an active household member. Together, these findings underscore that a better understanding of the neurobiological basis of cross-generational interactions is vital, and that such knowledge can be helpful in guiding interventions that consider the whole family. We advocate for a community neuroscience approach in developmental social neuroscience to capture the diversity of child-caregiver relationships in real-world settings.

COVID-19 as a chronic stressor and the importance of individual identity: A data-driven look at academic productivity during the pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted personal and professional life. For academics, research, teaching, and service tasks were upended and we all had to navigate the altered landscape. However, some individuals faced a disproportionate burden, particularly academics with minoritized identities or those who were early career, were caregivers, or had intersecting identities. As comparative endocrinologists, we determine how aspects of individual and species-level variation influence response to, recovery from, and resilience in the face of stressors. Here, we flip that framework and apply an integrative biological lens to the impact of the COVID-19 chronic stressor on our endocrine community. We address how the pandemic altered impact factors of academia (e.g., scholarly products) and relatedly, how factors of impact (e.g., sex, gender, race, career stage, caregiver status, etc.) altered the way in which individuals could respond. We predict the pandemic will have long-term impacts on the population dynamics, composition, and landscape of our academic ecosystem. Impact factors of research, namely journal submissions, were altered by COVID-19, and women authors saw a big dip. We discuss this broadly and then report General and Comparative Endocrinology (GCE) manuscript submission and acceptance status by gender and geographic region from 2019 to 2023. We also summarize how the pandemic impacted individuals with different axes of identity, how academic institutions have responded, compile proposed solutions, and conclude with a discussion on what we can all do to (re)build the academy in an equitable way. At GCE, the first author positions had gender parity, but men outnumbered women at the corresponding author position. Region of manuscript origin mattered for submission and acceptance rates, and women authors from Asia and the Middle East were the most heavily impacted by the pandemic. The number of manuscripts submitted dropped after year 1 of the pandemic and has not yet recovered. Thus, COVID-19 was a chronic stressor for the GCE community.

Participant diversity in Psychophysiology

The Society for Psychophysiological Research and accompanying journal, Psychophysiology, have increasingly incorporated diversity and inclusion into their posted values, conference programming, and science. Much of this focus on equity, diversity, and inclusion work has occurred since 2010. The current review content analyzed the articles published in Psychophysiology from 2010 through 2020 to determine if SPR and Psychophysiology's commitment to diversity and inclusion has resulted in changes to reporting and analysis of participant demographics. Demographic reporting practices were compared to APA reporting standards and the use of demographic variables assessed according to the guidance proffered in the introduction to Psychophysiology's 2016 Special Issue on Diversity and Representation. Results of the content analysis indicated near perfect reporting of biological sex and frequent reporting of average age. Age range and educational attainment were reported in over half of studies, while race or ethnicity were reported in only 17%. Socioeconomic status, income, gender identity, and sexual orientation were almost never reported. In over 60% of studies at least one major demographic variable was reported, but was not used in preliminary, main, or supplementary analyses as a covariate, moderator, or otherwise. SPR and Psychophysiology should continue advocating for increased reporting of major demographic variables and ethical analysis of demographic modulation of various psychophysiological mechanisms. We provide a preliminary template of reporting standards and call for the inclusion of more open science practices by psychophysiologists.

Gender imbalances among top-cited scientists across scientific disciplines over time through the analysis of nearly 5.8 million authors

We evaluated how the gender composition of top-cited authors within different subfields of research has evolved over time. We considered 9,071,122 authors with at least 5 full papers in Scopus as of September 1, 2022. Using a previously validated composite citation indicator, we identified the 2% top-cited authors for each of 174 science subfields (Science-Metrix classification) in 4 separate publication age cohorts (first publication pre-1992, 1992 to 2001, 2002 to 2011, and post-2011). Using NamSor, we assigned 3,784,507 authors as men and 2,011,616 as women (for 36.1% gender assignment uncertain). Men outnumbered women 1.88-fold among all authors, decreasing from 3.93-fold to 1.36-fold over time. Men outnumbered women 3.21-fold among top-cited authors, decreasing from 6.41-fold to 2.28-fold over time. In the youngest (post-2011) cohort, 32/174 (18%) subfields had > = 50% women, 97/174 (56%) subfields had > = 30% women, and 3 subfields had = <10% women among the top-cited authors. Gender imbalances in author numbers decreased sharply over time in both high-income countries (including the United States of America) and other countries, but the latter had little improvement in gender imbalances for top-cited authors. In random samples of 100 women and 100 men from the youngest (post-2011) cohort, in-depth assessment showed that most were currently (April 2023) working in academic environments. 32 women and 44 men had some faculty appointment, but only 2 women and 2 men were full professors. Our analysis shows large heterogeneity across scientific disciplines in the amelioration of gender imbalances with more prominent imbalances persisting among top-cited authors and slow promotion pathways even for the most-cited young scientists.

Interdisciplinary college curriculum and its labor market implications

This article sheds light on how to capture knowledge integration dynamics in college course content, improves and enriches the definition and measurement of interdisciplinarity, and expands the scope of research on the benefits of interdisciplinarity to postcollege outcomes. We distinguish between what higher education institutions claim regarding interdisciplinarity and what they appear to actually do. We focus on the core academic element of student experience-the courses they take, develop a text-based semantic measure of interdisciplinarity in college curriculum, and test its relationship to average earnings of graduates from different types of schools of higher education. We observe that greater exposure to interdisciplinarity-especially for science majors-is associated with increased earnings after college graduation.

Gender and retention patterns among U.S. faculty

Women remain underrepresented among faculty in nearly all academic fields. Using a census of 245,270 tenure-track and tenured professors at United States-based PhD-granting departments, we show that women leave academia overall at higher rates than men at every career age, in large part because of strongly gendered attrition at lower-prestige institutions, in non-STEM fields, and among tenured faculty. A large-scale survey of the same faculty indicates that the reasons faculty leave are gendered, even for institutions, fields, and career ages in which retention rates are not. Women are more likely than men to feel pushed from their jobs and less likely to feel pulled toward better opportunities, and women leave or consider leaving because of workplace climate more often than work-life balance. These results quantify the systemic nature of gendered faculty retention; contextualize its relationship with career age, institutional prestige, and field; and highlight the importance of understanding the gendered reasons for attrition rather than focusing on rates alone.

Stochastic modelling of intersectional pay gaps in universities

The gender and ethnicity pay gaps are well publicised for academics. The majority of research relies on observations representing a point in time or uses models to consider a standard academic lifespan. We use a stochastic mathematical model to ask what drives differences in lifetime earnings of university academics and highlight a new question: how best should we quantify a working lifetime? The model observes and accounts for patterns in age when entering and leaving the workforce, and differing salary trajectories during an academic career. It is parameterized with data from a national dataset in Aotearoa New Zealand. We compare the total lifetime earnings of different gender and ethnicity groups with and without accounting for the different lengths of time spent in academia. The lifetime earnings gaps are considerably larger when we account for different hiring and leaving ages. We find that overall, for every ethnicity, women have shorter careers and are more likely to leave academia. All minority ethnic groups-and women-earn considerably less than their male white, European colleagues.

Postdoctoral researchers' perspectives on working conditions and equal opportunities in German academia

Postdoctoral researchers (postdocs) are an essential component of the scientific workforce in German universities and research institutions and play a vital role in advancing knowledge and innovation. However, the experiences of postdocs and other early career researchers (ECRs) indicate that working conditions pose a significant challenge to the pursuit of a long-term research career in Germany-particularly for international scientists and those from marginalized groups. We examine how unstable working conditions as well as insufficient structural support for equal opportunities and diversity are significant obstacles for the career development of ECRs in German academia. We discuss these issues with the aid of an extensive survey recently conducted and published by PostdocNet, a target-group network representing the interests of postdocs across Germany's Max Planck Society. The survey drew responses from 659 postdoctoral researchers working at the Max Planck Society and represents one of the few datasets of postdoctoral researchers' perspectives in Germany. Building on these findings, we suggest actions at governmental, institutional, and individual levels to improve the working conditions of postdoctoral researchers in Germany.

Scoping Conceptions of Equity: Reviewing a Decade of Physical Activity Research

Lee and Cubbin's (2009) call for a "socially just" Ecological Model of Physical Activity (EMPA) prompted an inquiry into physical activity (PA), active living (AL) research that advances social justice framed as a set of equity-centered principles for research. In response to the call, we conducted a scoping review to explore how PAAL research has operationalized equity to advance a socially-just EMPA. We searched for original research, published between 2010 and 2020, using key terms for 'physical activity' and 'equity' that produced 5,152 non-duplicated records. Title-abstract screening for exclusion/inclusion criteria disqualified 4,392 records. A review protocol and coding guide was developed, piloted, and revised by team members. The remaining 760 abstracts were reviewed and consensus coded for PA Variable (dependent or independent) and Factor (individual outcome or contextual exposure), Equity (population demographic or social-environmental determinant), and Social Ecological Milieu (SEM) (PAAL-specific or SEM-general policy, system, or environment (PSE) operations. Of the 463 studies selected, PA codified as an individual outcome (67%) more often than as a contextual-exposure (33%) factor. Equity codified more frequently as a population demographic (69%) rather than as a social-environmental determinant (31%). The SEM codified as PAAL-specific (44%) or as SEM-general (56%) PSE factors. Based on multistep study abstract reviews, the selected studies more often missed the opportunity to center equity in PAAL research by examining social, environmental, political, and systemic factors as institutionalized inequities at the root of PAAL disparities. We will not achieve a socially-just EMPA without shared conceptualizations of equity followed by intentional action.

Why and how to incorporate issues of race/ethnicity and gender in research integrity education

With the increasing focus on issues of race/ethnicity and sex/gender1 across the spectrum of human activity, it is past time to consider how instruction in research integrity should incorporate these topics. Until very recently, issues of race/ethnicity and sex/gender have not typically appeared on any conventional lists of research integrity or responsible conduct of research (RCR) topics in the United States or, likely, other countries as well.2 However, I argue that not only can we incorporate these issues, we should do so to help accomplish some of the central goals of instruction in research integrity. I also offer some initial suggestions about where and how to incorporate them within familiar topics of instruction.

Gender and racial differences in first and senior authorship of high-impact critical care randomized controlled trial studies from 2000 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Females and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the first and senior authorships positions of academic publications. This stems from various structural and systemic inequalities and discrimination in the journal peer-review process, as well as educational, institutional, and organizational cultures.

METHODS

A retrospective bibliometric study design was used to investigate the representation of gender and racial/ethnic groups in the authorship of critical care randomized controlled trials in 12 high-impact journals from 2000 to 2022.

RESULTS

In the 1398 randomized controlled trials included in this study, only 24.61% of the first authors and 16.6% of the senior authors were female. Although female authorship increased during the study period, authorship was significantly higher for males throughout (Chi-square for trend, p < 0.0001). The educational attainment [χ²(4) = 99.2, p < 0.0001] and the country of the author's affiliated institution [χ²(42) = 70.3, p = 0.0029] were significantly associated with gender. Male authorship was significantly more prevalent in 10 out of 12 journals analyzed in this study [χ²(11) = 110.1, p < 0.0001]. The most common race/ethnic group in our study population was White (85.1% women, 85.4% males), followed by Asians (14.3% females, 14.3% males). Although there was a significant increase in the number of non-White authors between 2000 and 2022 [χ²(22) = 77.3, p < 0.0001], the trend was driven by an increase in non-White male and not non-White female authors. Race/ethnicity was significantly associated with the country of the author's affiliated institution [χ²(41) = 1107, p < 0.0001] but not with gender or educational attainment.

CONCLUSIONS

Persistent gender and racial disparities in high-impact medical and critical care journals underscore the need to revise policies and strategies to encourage greater diversity in critical care research.

Democratic governance and global science: A longitudinal analysis of the international research collaboration network

The democracy-science relationship has traditionally been examined through philosophical conjecture and country case studies. There remains limited global-scale empirical research on the topic. This study explores country-level factors related to the dynamics of the global research collaboration network, focusing on structural associations between democratic governance and the strength of international research collaboration ties. This study combines longitudinal data on 170 countries between 2008 and 2017 from the Varieties of Democracy Institute, World Bank Indicators, Scopus, and Web of Science bibliometric data. Methods include descriptive network analysis, temporal exponential random graph models (TERGM), and valued exponential random graph models (VERGM). The results suggest significant positive effects of democratic governance on the formation and strength of international research collaboration ties and homophily between countries with similar levels of democratic governance. The results also show the importance of exogenous factors, such as GDP, population size, and geographical distance, as well as endogenous network factors, including preferential attachment and transitivity.

Assessing opportunities and inequities in undergraduate ecological forecasting education

Conducting ecological research in a way that addresses complex, real-world problems requires a diverse, interdisciplinary and quantitatively trained ecology and environmental science workforce. This begins with equitably training students in ecology, interdisciplinary science, and quantitative skills at the undergraduate level. Understanding the current undergraduate curriculum landscape in ecology and environmental sciences allows for targeted interventions to improve equitable educational opportunities. Ecological forecasting is a sub-discipline of ecology with roots in interdisciplinary and quantitative science. We use ecological forecasting to show how ecology and environmental science undergraduate curriculum could be evaluated and ultimately restructured to address the needs of the 21^st century workforce. To characterize the current state of ecological forecasting education, we compiled existing resources for teaching and learning ecological forecasting at three curriculum levels: online resources; US university courses on ecological forecasting; and US university courses on topics related to ecological forecasting. We found persistent patterns (1) in what topics are taught to US undergraduate students at each of the curriculum levels; and (2) in the accessibility of resources, in terms of course availability at higher education institutions in the United States. We developed and implemented programs to increase the accessibility and comprehensiveness of ecological forecasting undergraduate education, including initiatives to engage specifically with Native American undergraduates and online resources for learning quantitative concepts at the undergraduate level. Such steps enhance the capacity of ecological forecasting to be more inclusive to undergraduate students from diverse backgrounds and expose more students to quantitative training.

Gender differences in animal cognition science

Women's representation in science is increasing steadily, with some fields closing gender parity in terms of participation and scientific output. Animal cognition appears to fall into that category. Our current analysis of gender author balance (women versus men) in 600 animal cognition papers supported parity in many aspects, but also revealed some remaining disparities. Women animal cognition scientists often held first authorship positions (58% of the studies), received similar numbers of citations, and published in equally high impact factor journals as men. Women were still under represented in last-author position, which often reflects seniority status (37% of last authors were women). There were interesting results when we considered the gender of teams (of two or more authors): all-women author teams were the minority in our dataset and received on average fewer citations than all men or mixed author teams, regardless of the quality of the journal (as measured by the journal's impact factor). Women more often focussed on mammals, whereas men more often focussed on fish, both as first authors and as same-gender teams. Men, as first author or in men-only teams, restricted their research more often to organisms of a single sex, compared to women, as first author and as members of a team. Our study suggests that there are many indices of the significant contribution of both women and men scientists in animal cognition, although some gender biases may remain.

Little transparency and equity in scientific awards for early- and mid-career researchers in ecology and evolution

Scientific awards can shape scientific careers, helping to secure jobs and grants, but can also contribute to the lack of diversity at senior levels and in the elite networks of scientists. To assess the status quo and historical trends, we evaluated 'best researcher' awards and 'best paper' early- and mid-career awards from broad-scope international journals and societies in ecology and evolution. Specifically, we collated information on eligibility rules, assessment criteria and potential gender bias. Our results reveal that, overall, few awards foster equitable access and assessment. Although many awards now explicitly allow extensions of the eligibility period for substantial career interruptions, there is a general lack of transparency in terms of assessment and consideration of other differences in access to opportunities and resources among junior researchers. Strikingly, open science practices were mentioned and valued in only one award. By highlighting instances of desirable award characteristics, we hope this work will nudge award committees to shift from simple but non-equitable award policies and practices towards strategies enhancing inclusivity and diversity. Such a shift would benefit not only those at the early- and mid-career stages but the whole research community. It is also an untapped opportunity to reward open science practices, promoting transparent and robust science.

Transforming bioengineering with unbiased teams and tools

Scientific bias originates from both researchers and techniques. Evidence-based strategies to mitigate this bias include the assembly of diverse teams, development of rigorous experimental designs, and use of unbiased analytical techniques. Here, we highlight potential starting points to decrease bias in bioengineering research.

Evidence for cultural differences in affect during mother-infant interactions

Maternal care is considered a universal and even cross-species set of typical behaviors, which are necessary to determine the social development of children. In humans, most research on mother-infant bonding is based on Western cultures and conducted in European and American countries. Thus, it is still unknown which aspects of mother-infant behaviors are universal and which vary with culture. Here we test whether typical mother-infant behaviors of affect-communication and affect-regulation are equally represented during spontaneous interaction in Palestinian-Arab and Jewish cultures. 30 Palestinian-Arab and 43 Jewish mother-infant dyads were recruited and videotaped. Using AffectRegulation Coding System (ARCS), we behaviorally analyzed the second-by-second display of valence and arousal in each participant and calculated the dynamic patterns of affect co-regulation. The results show that Palestinian-Arab infants express more positive valence than Jewish infants and that Palestinian-Arab mothers express higher arousal compared to Jewish mothers. Moreover, we found culturally-distinct strategies to regulate the infant: increased arousal in Palestinian-Arab dyads and increased mutual affective match in Jewish dyads. Such cross-cultural differences in affect indicate that basic features of emotion that are often considered universal are differentially represented in different cultures. Affect communication and regulation patterns can be transmitted across generations in early-life socialization with caregivers.

A gender perspective on the global migration of scholars

Although considerable progress toward gender equality in science has been made in recent decades, female researchers continue to face significant barriers in the academic labor market. International mobility has been increasingly recognized as a strategy for scientists to expand their professional networks, and that could help narrow the gender gap in academic careers. Using bibliometric data on over 33 million Scopus publications, we provide a global and dynamic view of gendered patterns of transnational scholarly mobility, as measured by volume, distance, diversity, and distribution, from 1998 to 2017. We find that, while female researchers continued to be underrepresented among internationally mobile researchers and migrate over shorter distances, this gender gap was narrowing at a faster rate than the gender gap in the population of general active researchers. Globally, the origin and destination countries of both female and male mobile researchers became increasingly diversified, which suggests that scholarly migration has become less skewed and more globalized. However, the range of origin and destination countries continued to be narrower for women than for men. While the United States remained the leading academic destination worldwide, the shares of both female and male scholarly inflows to that country declined from around 25% to 20% over the study period, partially due to the growing relevance of China. This study offers a cross-national measurement of gender inequality in global scholarly migration that is essential for promoting gender-equitable science policies and for monitoring the impact of such interventions.

Global evidence of gender equity in academic health research: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

PARTICIPANTS

Quantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support.

RESULTS

Literature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Reviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.

"Where do I even start?" Recommendations for faculty diversifying syllabi in ecology, evolution, and the life sciences

Diversifying curricula is of increasing interest in higher education, including in ecology and evolution and allied fields. Yet, many educators may not know where to start. Here we provide a framework for meeting standard curriculum goals while enacting anti-racist and anti-colonial syllabi that is grounded in the development of a sustainable network of educators. In addition to highlighting this professional learning process and sharing the list of resources our group has developed, we provide suggestions to help educators highlight contributions of minoritized groups, explore multiple ways of knowing, and perform critical assessments of foundational views of life and environmental science fields. We further discuss the key classroom dynamics that affect the success of such anti-racist and anti-colonial initiatives. The retention and success of minoritized students in ecology and evolution depends on whether we address injustices in our fields. Our hope is that our fellow educators will use this paper to catalyze their own efforts to diversify their courses.

Socioeconomic roots of academic faculty

Despite the special role of tenure-track faculty in society, training future researchers and producing scholarship that drives scientific and technological innovation, the sociodemographic characteristics of the professoriate have never been representative of the general population. Here we systematically investigate the indicators of faculty childhood socioeconomic status and consider how they may limit efforts to diversify the professoriate. Combining national-level data on education, income and university rankings with a 2017-2020 survey of 7,204 US-based tenure-track faculty across eight disciplines in STEM, social science and the humanities, we show that faculty are up to 25 times more likely to have a parent with a Ph.D. Moreover, this rate nearly doubles at prestigious universities and is stable across the past 50 years. Our results suggest that the professoriate is, and has remained, accessible disproportionately to the socioeconomically privileged, which is likely to deeply shape their scholarship and their reproduction.

Systemic racial disparities in funding rates at the National Science Foundation

Concerns about systemic racism at academic and research institutions have increased over the past decade. Here, we investigate data from the National Science Foundation (NSF), a major funder of research in the United States, and find evidence for pervasive racial disparities. In particular, white principal investigators (PIs) are consistently funded at higher rates than most non-white PIs. Funding rates for white PIs have also been increasing relative to annual overall rates with time. Moreover, disparities occur across all disciplinary directorates within the NSF and are greater for research proposals. The distributions of average external review scores also exhibit systematic offsets based on PI race. Similar patterns have been described in other research funding bodies, suggesting that racial disparities are widespread. The prevalence and persistence of these racial disparities in funding have cascading impacts that perpetuate a cumulative advantage to white PIs across all of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Labor advantages drive the greater productivity of faculty at elite universities

Faculty at prestigious institutions dominate scientific discourse, producing a disproportionate share of all research publications. Environmental prestige can drive such epistemic disparity, but the mechanisms by which it causes increased faculty productivity remain unknown. Here, we combine employment, publication, and federal survey data for 78,802 tenure-track faculty at 262 PhD-granting institutions in the American university system to show through multiple lines of evidence that the greater availability of funded graduate and postdoctoral labor at more prestigious institutions drives the environmental effect of prestige on productivity. In particular, greater environmental prestige leads to larger faculty-led research groups, which drive higher faculty productivity, primarily in disciplines with group collaboration norms. In contrast, productivity does not increase substantially with prestige for faculty publications without group members or for group members themselves. The disproportionate scientific productivity of elite researchers can be largely explained by their substantial labor advantage rather than inherent differences in talent.

A guide for writing anti-racist tenure and promotion letters

In a two-page tenure letter, senior faculty can make or break a career. This power has an outsized impact on Black academics and other scholars with marginalized identities, who are awarded tenure at lower rates than their white colleagues. We suggest that this difference in tenure rates is due to an implicit, overly narrow definition of academic excellence that does not recognize all the contributions that Black scholars make to their departments, institutions and academia in general. These unrecognized contributions include the (often invisible) burdens of mentoring and representation that these scholars bear disproportionately. Here we propose a set of practical steps for writing inclusive, anti-racist tenure letters, including what to do before writing the letter, what to include (and not include) in the letter itself, and what to do after writing the letter to further support the candidate seeking tenure. We are a group of mostly non-Black academics in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) based in the United States who are learning about and working toward Black liberation in academia; we hope these recommendations will help ongoing efforts to move toward an inclusive academia that appreciates and rewards diverse ways of doing, learning and knowing.

In Search of an Academic "Greatest Hits" Album: An Examination of Bibliometrics and Bibliometric Web Platforms

Despite the relative youth of bibliometric web platforms (Google Scholar was released in 2004), they play an increasingly significant role in the assessment of the impact of scholars and the research they produce. This scholarly essay provides a thorough review of the literature on bibliometric platforms, the extent to which they make available relevant manuscripts for inclusion in research, and their use for the assessment of scholarly work. We describe the metrics found on common bibliometric platforms, proposed metrics not commonly found in platforms, and how those metrics may differ based on scholar race and gender. We identify pitfalls of citation metrics present on bibliometric platforms. Finally, we identify areas for expansion of the research on bibliometric platforms and development of new metrics.