Abstract:Authorship is the primary form of symbolic capital in science. Despite this, authorship is rife with injustice and malpractice, with women expressing concerns regarding the fair attribution of credit. Based on an international survey, we examine gendered practices in authorship communication, disagreement, and fairness. Our results demonstrate that women were more likely to experience authorship disagreements and experience them more often. Their contributions to research papers were more often devalued by bot… Show more
“…We also observe that the lack of turn receiving opportunities lead women in male-dominated groups to communicate much less than their teammates (as measured by their fraction of outgoing communication ties, , ), a finding which is neither present in balanced groups nor in women dominated groups. This suggests that the social environment can impose constraints on women communication and relationship behavior in task-focused groups, complementing previous observations 45 . Figure 4 Signed interactions.…”
From sport and science production to everyday life, higher-level pursuits demand collaboration. Despite an increase in the number of data-driven studies on human behavior, the social dynamics of collaborative problem solving are still largely unexplored with network science and other computational and quantitative tools. Here we introduce escape rooms as a non-interventional and minimally biased social laboratory, which allows us to capture at a high resolution real-time communications in small project teams. Our analysis portrays a nuanced picture of different dimensions of social dynamics. We reveal how socio-demographic characteristics impact problem solving and the importance of prior relationships for enhanced interactions. We extract key conversation rules from motif analysis and discuss turn-usurping gendered behavior, a phenomenon particularly strong in male-dominated teams. We investigate the temporal evolution of signed and group interactions, finding that a minimum level of tense communication might be beneficial for collective problem solving, and revealing differences in the behavior of successful and failed teams. Our work unveils the innovative potential of escape rooms to study teams in their complexity, contributing to a deeper understanding of the micro-dynamics of collaborative team processes.
“…We also observe that the lack of turn receiving opportunities lead women in male-dominated groups to communicate much less than their teammates (as measured by their fraction of outgoing communication ties, , ), a finding which is neither present in balanced groups nor in women dominated groups. This suggests that the social environment can impose constraints on women communication and relationship behavior in task-focused groups, complementing previous observations 45 . Figure 4 Signed interactions.…”
From sport and science production to everyday life, higher-level pursuits demand collaboration. Despite an increase in the number of data-driven studies on human behavior, the social dynamics of collaborative problem solving are still largely unexplored with network science and other computational and quantitative tools. Here we introduce escape rooms as a non-interventional and minimally biased social laboratory, which allows us to capture at a high resolution real-time communications in small project teams. Our analysis portrays a nuanced picture of different dimensions of social dynamics. We reveal how socio-demographic characteristics impact problem solving and the importance of prior relationships for enhanced interactions. We extract key conversation rules from motif analysis and discuss turn-usurping gendered behavior, a phenomenon particularly strong in male-dominated teams. We investigate the temporal evolution of signed and group interactions, finding that a minimum level of tense communication might be beneficial for collective problem solving, and revealing differences in the behavior of successful and failed teams. Our work unveils the innovative potential of escape rooms to study teams in their complexity, contributing to a deeper understanding of the micro-dynamics of collaborative team processes.
“…The researchers found that men often did not even discuss authorship until the paper was about to be published, if at all. Women were more likely to discuss authorship at the onset of the collaboration 5 .…”
Nobel laureates Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier first met at a 2011 conference in Puerto Rico, where both gave talks about a then little-known biological system called CRISPR-Cas9, which bacteria use as an immune defence. They immediately hit it off. "She was coming to CRISPR from a very different perspective than I was," Doudna says. "And I liked her."The two women began working together across fields and continents -Doudna is a biochemist at the University of California, Berkeley. Charpentier, a microbiologist, was at Umeå University in Sweden at the time. Over the next year, they adapted the CRISPR system to edit DNA in any species. The technique is now used to genetically modify organisms for Emmanuelle Charpentier (left) and Jennifer Doudna (right) won the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry -the first all-female team to win a Nobel.
“…A broad body of work has studied this so-called "Matilda effect" 2 of under-attribution using a variety of tools ranging from feminist theory 3 to statistics 4 . The devaluing of women's contributions in academia manifests in a decremented interest in collaborating with women 5 , the devaluation of women's contributions to scientific research articles 6 , a pervasive perception that women have less academic excellence and ability 5,[7][8][9] , and a marked dearth of academic awards given to women 10,11 . Women also face longer publication review processes 12 , fewer invited paper commissions 13 , and lower citation rates 4,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] .…”
The historical and contemporary under-attribution of women's contributions to scientific scholarship is wellknown and well-studied, with effects that are felt today in myriad ways by women scientists. One measure of this under-attribution is the so-called citation gap between men and women: the under-citation of papers authored by women relative to expected rates coupled with a corresponding over-citation of papers authored by men relative to expected rates. We explore the citation gap in contemporary physics, analyzing over one million articles published over the last 25 years in 35 physics journals that span a wide range of subfields. Using a model that predicts papers' expected citation rates according to a set of characteristics separate from author gender, we find a global bias wherein papers authored by women are significantly under-cited, and papers authored by men are significantly over-cited. Moreover, we find that citation behavior varies along several dimensions, such that imbalances differ according to who is citing, where they are citing, and how they are citing. Specifically, citation imbalance in favor of man-authored papers is highest for papers authored by men, papers published in general physics journals, and papers likely to be less familiar to citing authors. Our results suggest that, although deciding which papers to cite is an individual choice, the cumulative effects of these choices needlessly harm a subset of scholars. We discuss several strategies for the mitigation of these effects, including conscious behavioral changes at the individual, journal, and community levels.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
