Women in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape

Math talk by mothers, fathers, and toddlers: Differences across materials and associations with children's math understanding

Learning words for numbers, shapes, spatial relations, and magnitudes-"math talk"-relies on input from caregivers. Language interactions between caregivers and children are situated in activity contexts and likely affected by available materials. Here, we examined how play materials influence the math talk directed to and produced by young children. We video-recorded parents (mothers and fathers; English- and/or Spanish-speaking) and their 24- to 36-month-olds during play with four sets of materials, transcribed and coded types of parent and toddler math words/phrases, and assessed toddlers' understanding of number, shape, and spatial relations terms. Categories of math words varied by materials. Numeracy talk (e.g., "one," "two," "first," "second") was more frequent during interactions with a picture book and toy grocery shopping set than with a shape sorter or magnet board; the reverse held for spatial talk (e.g., "out," "bottom," "up," "circle"). Parent math talk predicted toddler math talk, and both parent and toddler math talk predicted toddlers' understanding of spatial and number words. Different materials provide unique opportunities for toddlers to learn abstract math words during interactions with caregivers, and such interactions support early math cognition.

Female-dominated disciplines have lower evaluated research quality and funding success rates, for men and women

We use data from 30 countries and find that the more women in a discipline, the lower quality the research in that discipline is evaluated to be and the lower the funding success rate is. This affects men and women, and is robust to age, number of research outputs, and bibliometric measures where such data are available. Our work builds on others' findings that women's work is valued less, regardless of who performs that work.

A re-evaluation of gender bias in receptiveness to scientific evidence of gender bias

Gender bias has been documented in many aspects of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) careers, yet efforts to identify the underlying causes have been inconclusive. To what extent do cognitive biases, including unequal receptiveness in women and men to evidence of gender bias, contribute to gender bias in STEM? We investigated receptiveness in a STEM context among members of the general public, by undertaking a high-powered (total N = 1171) replication, including three experiments (2 pre-registered) of the prominent study by Handley et al. [22]. It was hypothesized that men would evaluate a research summary reporting evidence of gender bias less favourably than women but that there would be no difference between men and women's evaluations of research summaries unrelated to gender bias. The results revealed no effect of the assessor's gender on receptiveness to scientific evidence of gender bias. The different results compared to those of Handley et al. [22] suggest either that the gender bias they detected has diminished in the past decade or that their findings are a false positive. The present research adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that some influential studies on cognitive 'markers' of gender bias warrant re-examination.

Does facial structure explain differences in student evaluations of teaching? The role of fWHR as a proxy for perceived dominance

Dominance is usually viewed as a positive male attribute, but this is not typically the case for women. Using a novel dataset of student evaluations of teaching in a school of Business and Economics of a selective university, we construct the face width-to-height ratio (fWHR) as a proxy for perceived dominance to assess whether individuals with a higher ratio obtain better evaluations. Our results show that a higher fWHR is associated with a better evaluation for male faculty, while the opposite is the case for female faculty. These results are not due to differences in teachers' quality or beauty. In terms of magnitude, the effect of the fWHR is much larger for female professors. To the extent that fWHR is a good proxy of perceived dominance, it appears that conformity to traditional gender norms pays off for both men and women. However, the cost of challenging these norms is much larger for women than for men.

Exploring the global landscape of work-life balance research: A bibliometric and thematic analysis

The research on work-life balance (WLB) published in journals with a Scopus index between 2011 and 2022 is carefully examined in this work. Our research attempts to clarify the evolution and trends in WLB research and the importance of publications that Scopus indexes. After analyzing 2717 research articles, we found that WLB publications have a significant annual growth rate of 14.71 %, which suggests that the trend continues to grow. Significant changes are seen, with 1888 papers produced between 2017 and 2022 highlighting a notable increase in interest in the field. With 1608 papers, social sciences account for the majority of WLB research. With 54 publications, Griffith University (Australia) is the most affiliated institution. With 30 papers, the "Economic and Social Research Council of the United Kingdom" became the primary source of financing. The most prolific author, with nine publications, is Lingard H. At the same time, co-citation analysis reveals 168 co-cited authors. The United States (USA), the United Kingdom (U.K.), and Australia (A.U.) are the top three producing nations. A thematic analysis reveals ten major WLB themes, from work stress to difficulties with human resource management. This study provides crucial insights for policymakers and leaders to address work-life balance issues effectively. Using tools like Gephi or CiteSpace, we could deepen our understanding through advanced analysis methods such as page rank and network visualization.

Getting ahead in the social sciences: How parenthood and publishing contribute to gender gaps in academic career advancement

How do parenthood and publishing contribute to gender gaps in academic career advancement? While extensive research examines the causes of gender disparities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers, we know much less about the factors that constrain women's advancement in the social sciences. Combining detailed career- and administrative register data on 976 Danish social scientists in Business and Management, Economics, Political Science, Psychology, and Sociology (5703 person-years) that obtained a PhD degree between 2000 and 2015, we estimate gender differences in attainment of senior research positions and parse out how publication outputs, parenthood and parental leave contribute to these differences. Our approach is advantageous over previous longitudinal studies in that we track the careers and publication outputs of graduates from the outset of their PhD education and match this data with time-sensitive information on each individual's publication activities and family situation. In discrete time-event history models, we observe a ∼24 per cent female disadvantage in advancement likelihoods within the first 7 years after PhD graduation, with gender differences increasing over the observation period. A decomposition indicates that variations in publishing, parenthood and parental leave account for ∼ 40 per cent of the gender gap in career advancement, suggesting that other factors, including recruitment disparities, asymmetries in social capital and experiences of unequal treatment at work, may also constrain women's careers.

'She is failing; he is learning': Gender-differentiated attributions for girls' and boys' errors

BACKGROUND

According to gender-differentiated attributions of failure in the STEM field, errors tend to be attributed to internal factors more to girls than to boys.

AIMS

This experimental study explored factors influencing gender-differentiated teachers' internal attributions of girls' and boys' errors and the consequent likelihood of teachers' hesitancy to offer educational robotics (ER) courses to them. The predictions were as follows: (1) the likelihood of teachers' hesitancy would be related to gender-differentiated internal attributions of errors based on expectations of a low natural aptitude for girls; and (2) teachers with high levels of gender stereotypes would be more hesitant about offering ER to girls than to boys via the mediation of internal attributions of errors as being due to girls' low levels of natural aptitude for ER.

SAMPLE AND METHODS

In this experimental study, 155 Italian teachers (M = 38.59 years, SD = 8.20) responded to a questionnaire at the end of a course on ER in 2022. Teachers randomly read one of two vignettes describing a girl's or a boy's error during an ER course.

RESULTS

Results of multiple regression and moderated mediation analyses confirmed both predictions.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to reduce the gender STEM gap, the tendency to attribute girls' errors to internal and natural causes should be better inspected.

Gender imbalances in the editorial activities of a selective journal run by academic editors

The fairness of decisions made at various stages of the publication process is an important topic in meta-research. Here, based on an analysis of data on the gender of authors, editors and reviewers for 23,876 initial submissions and 7,192 full submissions to the journal eLife, we report on five stages of the publication process. We find that the board of reviewing editors (BRE) is men-dominant (69%) and that authors disproportionately suggest male editors when making an initial submission. We do not find evidence for gender bias when Senior Editors consult Reviewing Editors about initial submissions, but women Reviewing Editors are less engaged in discussions about these submissions than expected by their proportion. We find evidence of gender homophily when Senior Editors assign full submissions to Reviewing Editors (i.e., men are more likely to assign full submissions to other men (77% compared to the base assignment rate to men RE of 70%), and likewise for women (41% compared to women RE base assignment rate of 30%))). This tendency was stronger in more gender-balanced scientific disciplines. However, we do not find evidence for gender bias when authors appeal decisions made by editors to reject submissions. Together, our findings confirm that gender disparities exist along the editorial process and suggest that merely increasing the proportion of women might not be sufficient to eliminate this bias. Measures accounting for women's circumstances and needs (e.g., delaying discussions until all RE are engaged) and raising editorial awareness to women's needs may be essential to increasing gender equity and enhancing academic publication.

Male applicants are more likely to be awarded fellowships than female applicants: A case study of a Japanese national funding agency

Scientific grant applications are subjected to scholarly peer review. Studies show that the success rates of grant applications are often higher for male than for female applicants, suggesting that gender bias is common in peer review. However, these findings mostly come from studies in Europe, North America and Australia. Here we report the analyses of gender-specific success rates of applications to the fellowships offered by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). Because we analyze the observational data (i.e., not experimental), our aim here is to describe the possible gender gaps in the success rates, rather than the examination of gender bias per se. Results show that the success rates are consistently higher for male applicants than for female applicants among five different fellowship categories. The gender gaps in the success rates varied significantly between research fields in some Fellowship categories. Furthermore, in some fellowship categories, the gender gaps were significantly associated with the representation of female applicants (both positive and negative correlations were found). Though the causes of the gender gaps are unknown, unintentional gender bias during the review process is suggested. Pre-application gender gaps may also be contributing to the gender gaps in success rates. At least some of the observed gender gaps were relatively small, which may be partly explicable by the designs of the review process. However, gender gaps or biases acting prior to the application, such as self-selection bias, may have reduced the superficial gender gaps in the success rates. Further investigations that control for the effects of covariates (e.g., scientific merits of each applicant, which were not accessible to us) and those of other funding agencies, especially of non-Western countries, are warranted.

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.

When Sarah Meets Lawrence: The Effects of Coeducation on Women's College Major Choices

We leverage variation in the adoption of coeducation by U.S. women's colleges to study how exposure to a mixed-gender collegiate environment affects women's human capital investments. Our event-study analyses of newly collected historical data find a 3.0-3.5 percentage-point (30-33%) decline in the share of women majoring in STEM. While coeducation caused a large influx of male peers and modest increase in male faculty, we find no evidence that it altered the composition of the female student body or other gender-neutral inputs. Extrapolation of our main estimate suggests that coeducational environments explain 36% of the current gender gap in STEM.

Contextualizing Gender Disparity in Editorship in Psychological Science

Discourse on gender diversity tends to overlook differences across levels of hierarchy (e.g., students, faculty, and editors) and critical dimensions (e.g., subdisciplines and geographical locations). Further ignored is its intersection with global diversity-representation from different countries. Here we document and contextualize gender disparity from perspectives of equal versus expected representation in journal editorship, by analyzing 68 top psychology journals in 10 subdisciplines. First, relative to ratios as students and faculty, women are underrepresented as editorial-board members (41%) and-unlike previous results based on one subfield-as editors-in-chief (34%) as well. Second, female ratios in editorship vary substantially across subdisciplines, genres of scholarship (higher in empirical and review journals than in method journals), continents/countries/regions (e.g., higher in North America than in Europe), and journal countries of origin (e.g., higher in American journals than in European journals). Third, under female (vs. male) editors-in-chief, women are much better represented as editorial-board members (47% vs. 36%), but the geographical diversity of editorial-board members and authorship decreases. These results reveal new local and broad contexts of gender diversity in editorship in psychology, with policy implications. Our approach also offers a methodological guideline for similar disparity research in other fields.

Gender differences in the intention to study math increase with math performance

Even though females currently outnumber males in higher education, they remain largely underrepresented in math-related fields of study, with no sign of improvement during the past decades. To better understand which students drive this underrepresentation, we use PISA 2012 data on 251,120 15-year-old students in 61 countries to analyse boys' and girls' educational intentions along the ability distribution on math assessment tests. We analyze the percentages of boys and girls intending to pursue math-related studies or careers as a function of math performance. First, we show that for both boys and girls, there is a positive and linear relation between the probability of intending to pursue math and math performance. Second, the positive relation is stronger among boys than among girls. In particular, the gender gap in student intentions to pursue math-related studies or careers is close to zero among the poorest performers in math and increases steadily with math performance. Third, as a consequence, the gender gap in math performance, to the detriment of girls, is larger among students intending to pursue math than in the general student population.

Gender differences in peer reviewed grant applications, awards, and amounts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Differential participation and success in grant applications may contribute to women's lesser representation in the sciences. This study's objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to address the question of gender differences in grant award acceptance rates and reapplication award acceptance rates (potential bias in peer review outcomes) and other grant outcomes.

METHODS

The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021232153) and conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 standards. We searched Academic Search Complete, PubMed, and Web of Science for the timeframe 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2020, and forward and backward citations. Studies were included that reported data, by gender, on any of the following: grant applications or reapplications, awards, award amounts, award acceptance rates, or reapplication award acceptance rates. Studies that duplicated data reported in another study were excluded. Gender differences were investigated by meta-analyses and generalized linear mixed models. Doi plots and LFK indices were used to assess reporting bias.

RESULTS

The searches identified 199 records, of which 13 were eligible. An additional 42 sources from forward and backward searches were eligible, for a total of 55 sources with data on one or more outcomes. The data from these studies ranged from 1975 to 2020: 49 sources were published papers and six were funders' reports (the latter were identified by forwards and backwards searches). Twenty-nine studies reported person-level data, 25 reported application-level data, and one study reported both: person-level data were used in analyses. Award acceptance rates were 1% higher for men, which was not significantly different from women (95% CI 3% more for men to 1% more for women, k = 36, n = 303,795 awards and 1,277,442 applications, I² = 84%). Reapplication award acceptance rates were significantly higher for men (9%, 95% CI 18% to 1%, k = 7, n = 7319 applications and 3324 awards, I² = 63%). Women received smaller award amounts (g = -2.28, 95% CI -4.92 to 0.36, k = 13, n = 212,935, I² = 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

The proportions of women that applied for grants, re-applied, accepted awards, and accepted awards after reapplication were less than the proportion of eligible women. However, the award acceptance rate was similar for women and men, implying no gender bias in this peer reviewed grant outcome. Women received smaller awards and fewer awards after re-applying, which may negatively affect continued scientific productivity. Greater transparency is needed to monitor and verify these data globally.

The gender citation gap: Why and how it matters

The weight of evidence suggests that articles written by men and women receive citations at comparable rates. This suggests that research quality or gender-based bias in research evaluation and citing behaviors may not be the reason why academic women accumulate fewer citations than men at the career level. In this article, I outline a career perspective that highlights women's disadvantages in career progression as the root causes for the gender citation gap. I also consider how the gender citation gap may perpetuate the unequal pay between genders in science. My analysis of two different datasets, one including paper and citation information for over 130,000 highly cited scholars during the 1996-2020 period and another including citation and salary information for nearly 2,000 Canadian scholars over the 2014-2019 period, shows several important findings. First, papers written by women on average receive more citations than those written by men. Second, the gender citation gap grows larger with time as men and women progress in their careers, but the opposite pattern holds when research productivity and collaborative networks are considered. Third, higher citations lead to higher pay, and gender differences in citations explain a significant share of the gender wage gap. Findings demonstrate the critical need for more attention toward gender differences in career progression when investigating the causes and solutions for gender disparities in science.

Global Diversity of Authors, Editors, and Journal Ownership Across Subdisciplines of Psychology: Current State and Policy Implications

Diversity is the fuel of innovation. Global diversity-geographical or international diversification-is indispensable for developing a true psychological science of human beings but remains poorly understood. We surveyed 68 top psychology journals in 10 subdisciplines and examined the global diversity of authors, editors (i.e., members of academic editorial teams), and journal ownership. Results show that (a) the global diversity of authorship, editorship, and ownership is low in top psychology journals, with the United States boasting outsized influences; (b) disparity intensifies along the hierarchy of authors, editors, and journal ownership and substantially differs between subdisciplines and journal types; (c) removing the United States markedly increases global diversity and eliminates differences in diversity between subdisciplines and between authorship and editorship; and (d) more authors and editors are from the journal's home country (vs. a foreign journal) and from the editor-in-chief's home country (vs. a journal with a foreign editor-in-chief), and the home-country biases are most pronounced in the United States-journals from the United States or with U.S. editors-in-chief have the lowest global diversity in authorship and editorship. These results provide substantial novel insights into the global diversity of psychology journals, with implications for a new diversity policy to stimulate the generation of variety and, by extension, innovation.

Gender bias in special issues: evidence from a bibliometric analysis

Even though the majority of psychologists are women, they are outnumbered by men in senior academic ranks. One reason for this representation bias in academia is that men favor other men in decision-making, especially when the stakes are high. We tested the possibility of such bias in a bibliometric analysis, in which we coded editors' and authors' gender in regular and special issues, the latter considered of higher scientific prominence. We examined all special issues from five prominent scientific outlets in the fields of personality and social psychology published in the twenty-first century. Altogether, we analyzed 1911 articles nested in 93 sets comprising a special issue and a neighboring regular issue treated as a control condition. For articles published in special (but not regular) issues, when there were more men editors, more men first-authored and co-authored the work. This pattern suggests how gender bias can be perpetuated within academia and calls for revising the editorial policies of leading psychology journals.

What Is in a Name? Exploring Perceptions of Surname Change in Hiring Evaluations in Academia

The motherhood penalty reflects inequalities in the workplace based on caregiver status. A number of factors have been identified as potential triggers of motherhood penalty effects, such as becoming pregnant or taking maternity leave. However, little is known as to whether these effects could also be triggered by more subtle cues that may signal potential changes in caregiver status. The current study investigated the impact of surname change visible on publication lists in academics’ Google Scholar profiles on evaluations of competence, commitment, work–family balance, hiring, and promotion likelihood. Contrary to the predictions in our preregistration, the findings showed that women who have changed their surname received more favourable evaluations compared to those who did not. In addition, female participants favoured female academics who have changed their surname compared to those who did not and this was mediated by higher perceived competence and commitment scores. These findings were interpreted through the lens of social role theory and the role prioritisation model, suggesting that behaviours that are consistent with gendered expectations are evaluated more favourably.

The Issue of Gender Bias Represented in Authorship in the Fields of Exercise and Rehabilitation: A 5-Year Research in Indexed Journals

Despite progress made in recent decades, gender bias is still present in scientific publication authorship. The underrepresentation of women and overrepresentation of men has already been reported in the medical fields but little is known in the fields of exercise sciences and rehabilitation. This study examines trends in authorship by gender in this field in the last 5 years. All randomized controlled trials published in indexed journals from April 2017 to March 2022 through the widely inclusive Medline dataset using the MeSH term "exercise therapy" were collected, and the gender of the first and last authors was identified through names, pronouns and photographs. Year of publication, country of affiliation of the first author, and ranking of the journal were also collected. A chi-squared test for trends and logistic regression models were performed to analyze the odds of a woman being a first or last author. The analysis was performed on a total of 5259 articles. Overall, 47% had a woman as the first author and 33% had a woman as the last author, with a similar trend over five years. The trend in women's authorship varied by geographical area, with the higher representation of women authors in Oceania (first: 53.1%; last: 38.8%), North-Central America (first: 45.3%; last: 37.2%), and Europe (first: 47.2%; last: 33.3%). The logistic regression models (p < 0.001) indicated that women have lower odds of being authors in prominent authorship positions in higher-ranked journals. In conclusion, over the last five years, in the field of exercise and rehabilitation research, women and men are almost equally represented as first authors, in contrast with other medical areas. However, gender bias, unfavoring women, still exists, especially in the last authorship position, regardless of geographical area and journal ranking.

Female Dynamics in Authorship of Scientific Publications in the Public Library of Science: A 10-year Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Research

Women are generally underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). As scientific production reflects scholarly impact and participation in the scientific process, the number of journal publications forms a pertinent measure of academic productivity. This study examined the prevalence and evolution of female representation in prominent author positions across multidisciplinary biomedical research. Publications from seven exemplar cross-specialty journals of the Public Library of Science (PLoS Medicine, PLoS Biology, PLoS One, PLoS Computational Biology, PLoS Genetics, PLoS Pathogens, and PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases) between January 2010 and December 2020 were extracted from Web of Science. Using Genderize.io, the gender of authors from their first names was estimated using a 75% threshold. The association between female prevalence in first and last authorship and journal was evaluated using a binary logistic regression, and odds ratios were estimated against a 50:50 reference on gender. In 266,739 publications, 43.3% of first authors and 26.7% of last authors were females. Across the ten-year period, female first authorship increased by 19.6% and last authorship by 3.2%. Among all journals, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases had the greatest total proportion of female first authors (45.7%) and PLoS Medicine of female last authors (32%), while PLoS Computational Biology had the lowest proportion in these categories (23.7% and 17.2%). First authors were less likely to be females in all PLoS journals (p < 0.05) except for PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases (odds ratio: 0.84, 95% confidence interval: 0.71-1.00), where the odds of female authorship were not significantly different (p = 0.054). Last authors were not more likely to be females in all PLoS journals (p < 0.001). Overall, women still appear underrepresented as first authors in biomedical publications and their representation as last authors has severely lagged. Efforts towards gender equality in scholarly authorship will contribute to the representation of women in biomedical research and ensure that their potential is not lost.

Gender Inclusion and Fit in STEM

Despite progress made toward increasing women's interest and involvement in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), women continue to be underrepresented and experience less equity and inclusion in some STEM fields. In this article, I review the psychological literature relevant to understanding and mitigating women's lower fit and inclusion in STEM. Person-level explanations concerning women's abilities, interests, and self-efficacy are insufficient for explaining these persistent gaps. Rather, women's relatively lower interest in male-dominated STEM careers such as computer science and engineering is likely to be constrained by gender stereotypes. These gender stereotypes erode women's ability to experience self-concept fit, goal fit, and/or social fit. Such effects occur independently of intentional interpersonal biases and discrimination, and yet they create systemic barriers to women's attraction to, integration in, and advancement in STEM. Dismantling these systemic barriers requires a multifaceted approach to changing organizational and educational cultures at the institutional, interpersonal, and individual level.

Factors that affect scientific publication in Africa-A gender perspective

A large body of literature on gender differences in scientific publication output has clearly established that women scientists publish less that men do. Yet, no single explanation or group of explanations satisfactorily accounts for this difference, which has been called the "productivity puzzle". To provide a more refined portrait of the scientific publication output of women in relation to that of their male peers, we conducted a web-based survey in 2016 of individual researchers across all African countries, except Libya. The resulting 6,875 valid questionnaires submitted by respondents in the STEM, Health Science and SSH fields were analyzed using multivariate regressions on the self-reported number of articles published in the preceding 3 years. Controlling for a variety of variables including career stage, workload, mobility, research field, and collaboration, we measured the direct and moderating effect of gender on scientific production of African researchers. Our results show that, while women's scientific publication output is positively affected by collaboration and age (impediments to women's scientific output decrease later in their careers), it is negatively impacted by care-work and household chores, limited mobility, and teaching hours. Women are as prolific when they devote the same hours to other academic tasks and raise the same amount of research funding as their male colleagues. Our results lead us to argue that the standard academic career model, relying on continuous publications and regular promotions, assumes a masculine life cycle that reinforces the general perception that women with discontinuous careers are less productive than their male colleagues, and systematically disadvantages women. We conclude that the solution resides beyond women's empowerment, i.e., in the broader institutions of education and the family, which have an important role to play in fostering men's equal contribution to household chores and care-work.

Lived Experiences of Mothering and Teaching during the Pandemic: A Narrative Inquiry on College Faculty Mothers in the Philippines

How do academic mothers navigate their embodied selves in a disembodied academic life? More particularly, how do mothers in Philippine Higher Education balance the demands of mothering and teaching during the pandemic? This qualitative study used a narrative inquiry approach involving in-depth interviews with academic mothers from various faculties and ranks at some Philippine Higher Education Institutions. This approach explored the complex and often contradictory discourses surrounding the tension between the polarizing models of the ideal caring mother and ideal academic, trying to excel in both roles during the pandemic. The research began with an overview by way of a literature review of the pre-pandemic mother academics. It then reflected on eight mother college professors who balanced their careers with childcare, some with adult care, as this pandemic amplified deeply ingrained traditional social norms that perpetuate social inequities. Finally, it concluded that the two domains—academy and family—remained inhospitable to professing mothers in the Philippines. This study proposed that care work should be valorized, work–family narratives normalized and mainstreamed, and public and educational policies that support mothering and teaching rethought.

Inclusive Pathways to Invention: Racial and Ethnic Diversity Among Collegiate Student Inventors in a National Prize Competition

We present novel evidence from over 2,000 student inventors from colleges and universities across the United States who applied to a prestigious national prize. These unique data provide us with self-reported information about gender, race, and ethnicity for students earlier on the "pathway to invention" — young people who have already shown evidence of their inventiveness and are among those likely to be future patent holders. First, we show that 14% of prize applicants are from under-represented minority (URM) groups, which is a smaller gap than estimates of the racial/ethnic gap in patenting. We find striking differences in the focus of the inventions being created by URM inventors, particularly at the intersection of gender and race: URM men are much more likely than all other groups to work on consumer-oriented inventions and less likely to work on health care inventions. URM women are similar to non-URM students in being most likely to work on health care inventions. Differences by field of study show that URM men are more likely than other groups to come from business, and URM women are more likely to come from biological sciences. Finally, we show that slightly more URM applicants come from public research universities. A fruitful area for future research is examining the ways different types of universities support the development of URM students as inventors and contribute to URM students' continuation on the pathway to invention.

The gender gap in political psychology

Introduction

I investigated the authorship gender gap in research on political psychology.

Methods

The material comprises 1,166 articles published in the field's flagship journal Political Psychology between 1997 and 2021. These were rated for author gender, methodology, purpose, and topic.

Results

Women were underrepresented as authors (37.1% women), single authors (33.5% women), and lead authors (35.1% women). There were disproportionately many women lead authors in papers employing interviews or qualitative methodology, and in research with an applied purpose (these were all less cited). In contrast, men were overrepresented as authors of papers employing quantitative methods. Regarding topics, women were overrepresented as authors on Gender, Identity, Culture and Language, and Religion, and men were overrepresented as authors on Neuroscience and Evolutionary Psychology.

Discussion

The (denigrated) methods, purposes, and topics of women doing research on politics correspond to the (denigrated) "feminine style" of women doing politics grounding knowledge in the concrete, lived reality of others; listening and giving voice to marginalized groups' subjective experiences; and yielding power to get things done for others.

Rate of publication hastens, but number of publications slows academic promotion

Openings for an assistant professor often attract a hundred or more applicants. This allows hiring committees to select highly productive candidates based on their number of publications. Applicants with more rapid publication would be hired with little or no postgraduate experience, but those with slower rates of publication would need more postgraduate experience. Our results show an association of more postgraduate experience, slower rates of publication, a smaller research group, and slower promotion when years are measured from PhD granting; conversely little or no postgraduate experience is generally associated with more rapid publication, a larger research group, and faster promotion. These results suggest the unexpected result that the number and rate of publication have opposite effects on the years from PhD granting to promotion which parametric survival analysis using a log-logistic distribution with gamma frailty confirmed. Statistical analysis revealed that number and rate of publication are reciprocal suppressor variables which were individually weaker predictors of years to promotion, but much more powerful when combined. Intuitively, this is probably because number and rate of publication contain information about other variables with: (1) number of publications being associated with more postgraduate experience, a smaller research group, and slower rates of publication; and (2) rate of publication being associated with a larger research group, and less postgraduate experience. Further, we found that promotion committees closely follow institutional tenure policy requiring promotion a fixed number of years after hiring as an assistant professor which may partially explain why promotion committees fail adjust the number and rate of publication for research group size as fairness in promotion might favor. Our results suggest that both postgraduate experience and research group size influence a professor's career.

Engagement patterns with female and male scientists on Facebook

Social networks are becoming powerful agents mediating between science and the public. Considering the public tendency to associate science with men makes investigating representations of female scientists in social media important. Here we set out to find whether the commenting patterns to text-based science communication are similar. To examine these, we collected and analyzed posts (165) and their comments (10,006) published between 2016 and 2018 on an Israeli popular science Facebook page. We examined post characteristics as well as the relevance and sentiment of comments. Several gendered differences in commenting patterns emerged. Posts published by female scientists received more irrelevant and fewer relevant comments. Female scientists received more hostile and positive comments. These findings are consistent with results of previous research, but also demonstrate a more nuanced understanding that when female scientists write using scientific jargon (usually an unwanted feature of popular science writing), they received less hostile comments and were given less advice.

Uncovering sex/gender differences of arithmetic in the human brain: Insights from fMRI studies

Over the long run, STEM fields had been perceived as dominant by males, despite that numerous studies have shown that female students do not underperform their male classmates in mathematics and science. In this review, we discuss whether and how sex/gender shows specificity in arithmetic processing using a cognitive neuroscience approach not only to capture contemporary differences in brain and behavior but also to provide exclusive brain bases knowledge that is unseen in behavioral outcomes alone. We begin by summarizing studies that had examined sex differences/similarities in behavioral performance of mathematical learning, with a specific focus on large-scale meta-analytical data. We then discuss how the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) approach can contribute to understanding neural mechanisms underlying sex-specific effects of mathematical learning by reviewing structural and functional data. Finally, we close this review by proposing potential research issues for further exploration of the sex effect using neuroimaging technology. Through the lens of advancement in the neuroimaging technique, we seek to provide insights into uncovering sex-specific neural mechanisms of learning to inform and achieve genuine gender equality in education.

Same-gender citations do not indicate a substantial gender homophily bias

Can the male citation advantage (more citations for papers written by male than female scientists) be explained by gender homophily bias, i.e., the preference of scientists to cite other scientists of the same gender category? Previous studies report much evidence that this is the case. However, the observed gender homophily bias may be overestimated by overlooking structural aspects such as the gender composition of research topics in which scientists specialize. When controlling for research topics at a high level of granularity, there is only little evidence for a gender homophily bias in citation decisions. Our study points out the importance of controlling structural aspects such as gendered specialization in research topics when investigating gender bias in science.

Impact of gender on the formation and outcome of formal mentoring relationships in the life sciences

Despite increasing representation in graduate training programs, a disproportionate number of women leave academic research without obtaining an independent position that enables them to train the next generation of academic researchers. To understand factors underlying this trend, we analyzed formal PhD and postdoctoral mentoring relationships in the life sciences during the years 2000 to 2020. Student and mentor gender are both associated with differences in rates of student’s continuation to positions that allow formal academic mentorship. Although trainees of women mentors are less likely to take on positions as academic mentors than trainees of men mentors, this effect is reduced substantially after controlling for several measurements of mentor status. Thus, the effect of mentor gender can be explained at least partially by gender disparities in social and financial resources available to mentors. Because trainees and mentors tend to be of the same gender, this association between mentor gender and academic continuation disproportionately impacts women trainees. On average, gender homophily in graduate training is unrelated to mentor status. A notable exception to this trend is the special case of scientists having been granted an outstanding distinction, evidenced by membership in the National Academy of Sciences, being a grantee of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, or having been awarded the Nobel Prize. This group of mentors trains men graduate students at higher rates than their most successful colleagues. These results suggest that, in addition to other factors that limit career choices for women trainees, gender inequities in mentors’ access to resources and prestige contribute to women’s attrition from independent research positions.

Does the gender of academic mentors impact the careers of their trainees? In the life sciences, graduate and postdoctoral trainees of women mentors are less likely to continue on to positions as academic mentors than trainees of men. This study finds that gender inequality in mentors’ access to resources contributes to this disparity.

Stereotypic beliefs contribute to gender disparities in the field of economics

Why are women under-represented in the field of economics relative to men? We propose that stereotypes associated with economists contribute to women's interest in the field. We test the predictions that economists are stereotypically associated with low levels of communion and high levels of agency and that this type of stereotype content is associated with women's lower interest in the field. In Study 1 (N = 883), stereotypes associated with people in the field of economics were masculine, characterized with low levels of communion and high levels of agency. In Study 2 (N = 182), undergraduate women were less interested than men in majoring in fields that share the same pattern of stereotyping found for economists in Study 1. The results from this study have important implications for increasing young women's interest and representation in the field of economics.

The gender gap in higher STEM studies: A systematic literature review

The development of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) requires more qualified professionals in these fields. However, gender segregation in higher education in this sector is creating a gender gap that means that for some disciplines female representation does not even reach 30% of the total. In order to propose measures to address the phenomenon, it is necessary to understand the possible causes of this issue. A systematic literature review and mapping were carried out for the study, following the PRISMA guidelines and flowchart. The research questions to be answered were (RQ1) What studies exist on the gender gap in relation to the choice of higher education in the STEM field; and (RQ2) How do gender roles and stereotypes influence decision-making related to higher education? The review of peer-reviewed scientific articles, conferences texts, books and book chapters on the European education area was applied. A total of 4571 initial results were obtained and, after the process marked by the PRISMA flowchart, the final results were reduced to 26. The results revealed that gender stereotypes are strong drivers of the gender gap in general, and the Leaky Pipeline and Stereotype Threat in particular. To narrow the gender gap, it is necessary to focus on influences from the family, the educational environment, and the peer group, as well as from the culture itself. Positive self-concept, self-efficacy, self-confidence, and self-perception need to be fostered, so that the individual chooses their studies according to their goals.

Falsification of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire: No Evidence of Systemic Sexual Harassment in Academic STEM

Herein, the socio-psychological narrative of sexual harassment (SH) is critically evaluated. The notion of systemic SH in university departments of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is contradicted by the overwhelming (>90%) career satisfaction among female STEM academics. The Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ), central to the study of SH, inheres the nominalistic fallacy. SEQ usage deploys subjectivist methodologies, categorical ambiguity, the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, and treats respondents as cyphers. Intercorrelation of SEQ factors reduces response statistics by 42%, while phase-space vector geometry indicates the SEQ does not measure SH. Personality analysis implies that serial abusers dominate the incidence of SH. The widespread notion that 20–25% of female college students suffer violent sexual assault rests on a misreading of published work. The 2016 Campus Climate Survey permits an upper limit estimate that 3.2% of female college students suffer rape at the hands of 4.3% of male student perpetrators, largely accompanied by drugs or alcohol. The 2018 National Academy (NAS) Report on sexual harassment in STEM exhibits negligent scholarship and carelessly generalizing statistics and may itself promote violation of the EEOC legal definition of SH. Despite instances of grievous sex-based abuse, there is no evidence that female STEM academics face systemic sexual harassment. Finally, evolutionary psychology and the social significance of personality provide a scientific understanding of SH.

Meta-Research: How parenthood contributes to gender gaps in academia

Being a parent has long been associated with gender disparities in academia. However, details of the mechanisms by which parenthood and gender influence academic career achievement and progression are not fully understood. Here, using data from a survey of 7,764 academics in North America and publication data from the Web of Science, we analyze gender differences in parenthood and academic achievements and explore the influence of work-family conflict and partner support on these gender gaps. Our results suggest that gender gaps in academic achievement are, in fact, “parenthood gender gaps.” Specifically, we found significant gender gaps in most of the measures of academic achievement (both objective and subjective) in the parent group but not in the non-parent group. Mothers are more likely than fathers to experience higher levels of work-family conflict and to receive lower levels of partner support, contributing significantly to the gender gaps in academic achievement for the parent group. We also discuss possible interventions and actions for reducing gender gaps in academia.

Numeracy Gender Gap in STEM Higher Education: The Role of Neuroticism and Math Anxiety

The under-representation of women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) is ubiquitous and understanding the roots of this phenomenon is mandatory to guarantee social equality and economic growth. In the present study, we investigated the contribution of non-cognitive factors that usually show higher levels in females, such as math anxiety (MA) and neuroticism personality trait, to numeracy competence, a core component in STEM studies. A sample of STEM undergraduate students, balanced for gender (N_F = N_M = 70) and Intelligent Quotient (IQ), completed online self-report questionnaires and a numeracy cognitive assessment test. Results show that females scored lower in the numeracy test, and higher in the non-cognitive measures. Moreover, compared to males’, females’ numeracy scores were more strongly influenced by MA and neuroticism. We also tested whether MA association to numeracy is mediated by neuroticism, and whether this mediation is characterized by gender differences. While we failed to detect a significant mediation of neuroticism in the association between MA and numeracy overall, when gender was added as a moderator in this association, neuroticism turned out to be significant for females only. Our findings revealed that non-cognitive factors differently supported numeracy in females and males in STEM programs.

Using social media advertisement data to monitor the gender gap in STEM: opportunities and challenges

Boosting the number of women and girls entering careers involving STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) is crucial to achieving gender equality, one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Girls and women tend to gravitate away from STEM fields at multiple stages from childhood through mid-career. The leaky pipeline is a metaphor often used to describe the loss of women in STEM and arguably other fields before reaching senior roles. Do interests expressed on social media mirror the leaky pipeline phenomenon? In this article, we collected advertisement data (reach estimates) from Facebook and Instagram disaggregated by US metros, age, gender, and interests related to STEM. We computed the Gender Gap Index (GGI) for each US metro and age group. We found that on Instagram, the GGIs for interest in Science decrease as users' age increases, suggesting that relatively there is evidence that that women, compared to men, are losing interest in STEM at older ages. In particular, we find that on Instagram, there are plausible relative trends but implausible absolute levels. Nevertheless, is this enough to conclude that online data available from Instagram mirror the leaky pipeline phenomenon? To scrutinize this, we compared the GGIs for an interest in Science with the GGIs for placebo interests unrelated to STEM. We found that the GGIs for placebo interests follow similar age patterns as the GGIs for the interest in Science across US metros. Second, we attempted to control for the time spent on the platform by computing a usage intensity gender ratio based on the difference between daily and monthly active users. This analysis showed that the usage intensity gender ratio is higher among teenagers (13-17 years) than other older age groups, suggesting that teenage girls are more engaged on the platform that teenage boys. We hypothesize that usage intensity differences, rather than inherent interest changes, might create the illusion of a leaky pipeline. Despite the previously demonstrated value and huge potential of social media advertisement data to study social phenomena, we conclude that there is little evidence that this novel data source can measure the decline in interest in STEM for young women in the USA.

Leak or link? the overrepresentation of women in non-tenure-track academic positions in STEM

This paper examines gender variation in departures from the tenure-track science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) academic career pathway to non-tenure-track academic careers. We integrate multiple data sources including the Survey of Earned Doctorates and the Survey of Doctorate Recipients to examine longitudinal career outcomes of STEM doctorate women. We consider three types of careers after receipt of a PhD: academic, academic non-tenure-track, and non-academic positions. We find that STEM women are more likely to hold academic non-tenure-track positions, which are associated with lower job satisfaction and lower salaries among men and women. Explanations including differences in field of study, preparation in graduate school, and family structure only explain 35 percent of the gender gap in non-tenure-track academic positions.

U.S. Women Faculty in the Social Sciences Also Face Gender Inequalities

There is a national interest in United States women's underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); however, gender inequality in the social sciences has not received similar attention. Although women increasingly earn postgraduate degrees in the social sciences, women faculty still experience gender inequities. Consistent gender inequities include slower career advancement, blunted salaries, unequal workloads, work-life conflict, systemic gender biases, underrepresentation in positions of power, and hostile work environments. Cultural biases suggest that once women have achieved parity, gender bias no longer exists. This review challenges that notion by providing evidence from social science domains in which women are well-represented but continue to face systemic gender biases. We examine cultural influences on gender representation and career advancement in psychology, economics, political science, sociology, and anthropology. We make interdisciplinary comparisons of career trajectories and salaries using national data, documenting patterns across the social sciences. For example, women economists face gendered standards in publishing, and women political scientists are less likely to have their work cited than men. Furthermore, data show that salaries become stagnant as the representation of women in these fields increases. These disparities reflect cultural biases in perceptions of women's competence stemming from social role theory. We discuss best practices to address these problems, focusing on the ADVANCE organizational change programs funded by the National Science Foundation that target (a) improving academic climate, (b) providing professional development, and (c) fostering social networking. Federally supported interventions can reveal systemic gender biases in academia and reduce gender disparities for women academics in the social sciences.

The Extent of Gender Gap in Citations in Ophthalmology Literature

Purpose

To investigate the severity and causes of gender imbalance in the counts of ophthalmology citations.

Methods

The PubMed database was searched to identify cited papers that were published in four journals (Prog Retin Eye Res, Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmol, and Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci) between August 2015 and July 2020, and those that referenced these cited papers by 2021 July (i.e., citing papers). The gender category of a given paper is defined by the gender of the first and last author (MM, FM, MF, and FF; M means male and F means female). A generalized additive model to predict the expected proportion was fitted. The difference between the observed proportion and expected proportion of citations of a paper’s gender category was the primary outcome.

Results

The proportion of female-led (MF and FF) papers slightly increased from 27% in 2015 to 30% in 2020. MM, FM, MF, and FF papers were cited as −9.3, −1.5, 13.0, and 23.9% more than expected, respectively. MM papers cited 13.9% more male-led (MM and FM) papers than female-led papers, and FF papers cited 33.5% fewer male-led papers than female-led papers. The difference between the observed proportion and expected proportion of MM citing papers within male-led and female-led cited papers grew at a rate of 0.13 and 0.67% per year.

Conclusion

The high frequency of citations of female-led papers might narrow the gender gap in the citation count within ophthalmology. These findings show that papers by female-led are less common, so the gender gap might still exist even with their high citation count.

What does gender has to do with math? Complex questions require complex answers

Whether mathematics is a gendered domain or not is a long-lasting issue bringing along major social and educational implications. The females' underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) has been considered one of the key signs of the math gender gap, although the current view largely attributes the origin of this phenomenon to sociocultural factors. Indeed, recent approaches to math gender differences reached the universal conclusion that nature and nurture exert reciprocal effects on each other, establishing the need for approaching the study of the math gender issue only once its intrinsic complexity has been accepted. Building upon a flourishing literature, this review provides an updated synthesis of the evidence for math gender equality at the start, and for math gender inequality on the go, challenging the role of biological factors. In particular, by combining recent findings from different research areas, the paper discusses the persistence of the "math male myth" and the associated "female are not good at math myth," drawing attention to the complex interplay of social and cultural forces that support such stereotypes. The suggestion is made that longevity of these myths results from the additive effects of two independent cognitive biases associated with gender stereotypes and with math stereotypes, respectively. Scholars' responsibility in amplifying these myths by pursuing some catching lines of research is also discussed.