Rosalind’s Ghost: Biology, Collaboration, and the Female

Wagner, Caroline S.

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2001003

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems intuitive that women are more likely to be authors on papers submitted from countries that are more gender equal in rights and opportunities. However, this is counter the observation that women tend to be better represented among STEM graduates in less gender equal countries (Stoet & Geary, ), possibly because they have fewer career opportunities outside academia in less gender equal societies, and that the representation of women among scientists (across all fields) is uncorrelated among countries with the United Nations gender equality index (Wagner, ). One explanation for this inconsistency between geographic patterns in female representation in our authorship data for ecology journals and geographic patterns in STEM and science authorship more generally may be that ecologists (and other life scientists) require lower quantitative skills and, in the United States, require lower quantitative scores on graduate school entrance exams (Ceci, Ginther, Kahn, & Williams, ), than do other sciences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…It is in mathematics that the gender disparity in performance and anxiety covaries most negatively among countries with gender equality (Stoet, Bailey, Moore, & Geary, ), whereas women generally exceed men in reading comprehension, and the degree to which women exceed men in reading comprehension is greatest in more gender equal countries (Stoet & Geary, ). These gender differences in math and reading performance (and anxiety) likely contribute to explaining why women are much better represented in the life sciences than in other STEM fields (Ceci et al, ; Wagner, ), and could explain why we see female representation among authors in ecology increasing with gender equality in their home countries, unlike the patterns observed for STEM programs more broadly.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…It seems intuitive that women are more likely to be authors on papers submitted from countries that are more gender equal in rights and opportunities. However, this is counter the observation that women tend to be better represented among STEM graduates in less gender equal countries (Stoet & Geary, 2018), possibly because they have fewer career opportunities outside academia in less gender equal societies, and that the representation of women among scientists (across all fields) is uncorrelated among countries with the United Nations gender equality index (Wagner, 2016 Moore, & Geary, 2016), whereas women generally exceed men in reading comprehension, and the degree to which women exceed men in reading comprehension is greatest in more gender equal countries (Stoet & Geary, 2018). These gender differences in math and reading performance (and anxiety) likely contribute to explaining why women are much better represented in the life sciences than in other STEM fields (Ceci et al, 2014;Wagner, 2016), and could explain why we see female representation among authors in ecology increasing with gender equality in their home countries, unlike the patterns observed for STEM programs more broadly.…”

Section: Geographic Variation In Authorship Rolesmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Fox

Ritchey

Paine

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…It seems intuitive that women are more likely to be authors on papers submitted from countries that are more gender equal in rights and opportunities. However, this is counter the observation that women tend to be better represented among STEM graduates in less gender equal countries (Stoet & Geary, 2018), possibly because they have fewer career opportunities outside academia in less gender equal societies, and that the representation of women among scientists (across all fields) is uncorrelated among countries with the United Nations gender equality index (Wagner, 2016 Moore, & Geary, 2016), whereas women generally exceed men in reading comprehension, and the degree to which women exceed men in reading comprehension is greatest in more gender equal countries (Stoet & Geary, 2018). These gender differences in math and reading performance (and anxiety) likely contribute to explaining why women are much better represented in the life sciences than in other STEM fields (Ceci et al, 2014;Wagner, 2016), and could explain why we see female representation among authors in ecology increasing with gender equality in their home countries, unlike the patterns observed for STEM programs more broadly.…”

Section: Geographic Variation In Authorship Rolesmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Fox

Ritchey

Paine

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; service roles, Misra et al . ; hiring, Sheltzer and Smith ; prizes, Wagner ). This overall lack of representation at higher ranks could mean that some of the best minds are not currently being recruited or retained (Goulden et al .…”

Section: Recommended Positive Actions Suggested By Survey Respondentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equity and career‐life balance in marine mammal science?

Hooker

Simmons

Stimpert

et al. 2017

Marine Mammal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is widely acknowledged that family and care-giving responsibilities are driving women away from Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields. Marine mammal science often incurs heavy fieldwork and travel obligations, which make it a challenging career in which to find work-life balance. This opinion piece explores gender equality, equity (the principles of fairness that lead to equality), and work-life balance in science generally and in this field in particular. We aim to (1) raise awareness of these issues among members of the Society for Marine Mammalogy; (2) explore members' attitudes and viewpoints collected from an online survey and further discussion at a biennial conference workshop in 2015; and (3) make suggestions for members to consider for action, or for the Board of Governors to consider in terms of changes to policy or procedures. Leaks in our pipeline-the attrition of women, and others with additional caring responsibilities-represent an intellectual and economic loss. By striving for equity and promoting work-life balance, we will help to ensure a healthy and productive Society better able to succeed in its aims promoting education, high quality research, conservation, and management of marine mammals.

show abstract

“…A recent meta-analysis shows persistent gaps in research productivity and impact between man and women, and some evidence of gender bias in the assessment of research records [ 8 ]. Studies show that women in science are under-cited [ 4 , 9 , 10 ], under-paid [ 9 ], under-promoted [ 3 ] and professionally under-recognized [ 6 , 11 ] relative to their male counterparts. Moreover, relatively few women reach senior positions despite the growing number of women moving into doctoral studies and academic careers [ 3 , 7 , 12 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender gaps in research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in the U.S., Canada, and South Africa

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study builds upon the literature documenting gender disparities in science by investigating research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in three countries. This analysis departs from both the general comparison of researchers across organizational settings and academic appointments on one hand, and the definition of “elite” by the research outcome variables on the other, which are common in previous studies. Instead, this paper’s approach considers the stratification of scientific careers by carefully constructing matched samples of men and women holding research chairs in Canada, the United States and South Africa, along with a control group of departmental peers. The analysis is based on a unique, hand-curated dataset including 943 researchers, which allows for a systematic comparison of successful scientists vetted through similar selection mechanisms. Our results show that even among elite scientists a pattern of stratified productivity and recognition by gender remains, with more prominent gaps in recognition. Our results point to the need for gender equity initiatives in science policy to critically examine assessment criteria and evaluation mechanisms to emphasize multiple expressions of research excellence.

show abstract

Rosalind’s Ghost: Biology, Collaboration, and the Female

Cited by 12 publications

References 11 publications

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

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

Equity and career‐life balance in marine mammal science?

Gender gaps in research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in the U.S., Canada, and South Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About