Much of the available evidence regarding COVID-19 effects on the scientific community in the U.S. is anecdotal and non-representative. We report findings from a based survey of university-based biologists, biochemists, and civil and environmental engineers regarding negative and positive COVID-19 impacts, respondent contributions to addressing the pandemic, and their opinions regarding COVID-19 research policies. The most common negative impact was university closures, cited by 93% of all scientists. Significant subgroup differences emerged, with higher proportions of women, assistant professors, and scientists at institutions located in COVID-19 “hotspot” counties reporting difficulties concentrating on research. Assistant professors additionally reported facing more unanticipated childcare responsibilities. Approximately half of the sample also reported one or more positive COVID-19 impacts, suggesting the importance of developing a better understanding of the complete range of impacts across all fields of science. Regarding COVID-19 relevant public policy, findings suggest divergence of opinion concerning surveillance technologies and the need to alter federal approval processes for new tests and vaccines.

Stay-at-home-orders, online learning, and work from home policies are some of the responses governments, universities, and other institutions adopted to slow the spread of COVID-19. However, research shows these measures have increased pre-existing gender disparities in the workplace. The working conditions for women during the pandemic worsened due to increased family care responsibilities and unequal distribution of domestic labor. In the academy, working from home has resulted in reduced research time and increased teaching and family care responsibilities, with a larger proportion of that burden falling to women. We investigate the persistence of gender inequity among academic scientists resulting from university COVID-19 responses over time. We draw on two surveys administered in May 2020 and May 2021 to university-based biologists, biochemists, and civil and environmental engineers, to analyze how the pandemic response has disproportionately impacted women in academia and the endurance of those inequities. Results show significantly greater negative impacts from the pandemic on women’s research activities and work-life balance, compared to men. We conclude by discussing the implications of our results, and the need for the academy to better predict and adjust to the gender disparities its policies create.

The use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) by local governments is widespread and meant to improve managerial effectiveness and public engagement. ICTs are commonly used by governments to collaborate and communicate with stakeholders. Yet, the use of ICTs increases local governments exposure to cyberthreats. Cyberthreats are increasing and local governments are often under-resourced and underprepared for them. While many organizations combat cyberthreats with technological solutions, it is well known that social aspects—including manager vigilance and buy-in—are critical in reducing cyber incidents. Thus, governments require both social and technical solutions to cyberthreats. This research takes a sociotechnical perspective to examine the relationships between social (e.g., values and perceptions) and technical factors (e.g., design and capacity) and cyber incidents in local government. We use data from a 2018 national survey of public managers in 500 U.S. cities, data from city government websites, and the U.S. Census. The results indicate that manager buy-in and perceptions interact with technical aspects to explain reported cyber incidents in government. The findings expand our understanding of how social and technical factors are associated with cyberthreats in government, particularly manager.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the inaccessibility of government information and communication technologies (ICTs) for members of the disability community. Organizational learning around ICT accessibility can be impacted by factors influencing strategies and assumptions or values and norms. Using data collected over two time periods in 2021, we study how the accessibility of US state health agencies COVID-19 information and vaccine websites improve over time. We examine how time, state policies, and partisanship influence organizational learning around website accessibility. Our analysis determines that the longer a COVID-19 related website exists on the Internet, the less accessible the website. We also find that more extensive internal state accessibility policies are more correlated with websites that meet fundamental accessibility requirements. Additionally, we find that partisanship plays an unexpected role in meeting fundamental accessibility demands, although both state policies and politics do not influence if an ICT meets the best practices standards of accessibility. Our paper initiates a discussion around the factors that influence organizational learning about government website accessibility and points to future research questions where the primary ICT function is not influenced by a rapidly evolving pandemic.

No abstract