Visible name changes promote inequity for transgender researchers

Gaskins, Leo C.; McClain, Craig R.

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001104

Cited by 21 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the impact of unprofessional peer reviewer comments, defined as “any statement that is unethical or irrelevant to the nature of the work” [ 39 ], have disproportionately negative effects for women and nonbinary people relative to men [ 39 ]. We also would like to acknowledge that biases experienced by women are likely to be exacerbated for nonbinary individuals, and, so far, little attention has been given to the effects on these groups (but see positive change [ 40 ]).…”

Section: Pivoting the Paradigm To Ensure Equitable Evaluation In Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Success and impact metrics in science are based on a system that perpetuates sexist and racist “rewards” by prioritizing citations and impact factors. These metrics are flawed and biased against already marginalized groups and fail to accurately capture the breadth of individuals’ meaningful scientific impacts. We advocate shifting this outdated value system to advance science through principles of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. We outline pathways for a paradigm shift in scientific values based on multidimensional mentorship and promoting mentee well-being. These actions will require collective efforts supported by academic leaders and administrators to drive essential systemic change.

show abstract

Section: Pivoting the Paradigm To Ensure Equitable Evaluation In Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is possible that some authors changed their names during the study period, which may have prevented us from identifying authors who published multiple invited submissions. Although name changes would likely have had little influence on these findings, name changes may have been more likely among transgender academics (Gaskins & McClain, 2021) and women academics, given marital name change conventions in Western nations. Another strength was the analysis of all authors, which enabled us to interrogate authorship data with more nuance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Gender disparities in authorship of invited submissions in high-impact psychology journals.

Mackelprang¹,

Johansen²,

Orr³

2023

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Women comprise the majority of graduates from psychology doctoral programs, but equity is yet to be achieved in the professoriate. Publication drives career advancement, underscoring the need to investigate publication-based metrics of eminence. To our knowledge, authorship of invited submissions-a proxy of research esteem-has not been the focus of any psychology studies. In this cross-sectional study, authorship of invited submission(s) in five elite psychology journals (2015-2019) was investigated: Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Annual Review of Psychology, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, and Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. We hypothesized that women would be underrepresented. Author gender was classified using publicly available details (e.g., pronouns on professional websites). Primary outcomes were the proportion of women solo-, first-, or likely invited authors, relative to the proportion of women full and associate professors in psychology at R1 institutions (42.3%). Of 1,828 authorship positions (713 articles), 35.6% were occupied by women. Relative to the nominated base rate, women were disproportionately underrepresented. When the likely invited author on a multi-author publication was a woman, the first author was a woman on 51.0% of papers; when the likely invited author was a man, the first author was a woman on 34.1% of papers. These findings align with prior studies and extend the research by demonstrating that the gender publication gap in psychology is exacerbated in invited submissions and driven by particular subfields. Continued efforts are needed to redress

show abstract

“…The gendered expectations common in STEM fields can make it particularly difficult to be gender non-conforming in the field due to gender stereotypes as well as discrimination such as misgendering ( Goldberg et al, 2021 ). Moreover, people who have changed their names to reflect their gender identity may be in danger of their non-cis identity being revealed against their wishes due to their publication records retaining a previous name, a potential additional stressor for trans people in academia ( Gaskins and McClain, 2021 ). Joni Wallis, who is a professor at the University of California, Berkeley in the Department of Psychology and the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute and is a trans woman, highlighted some additional issues relevant to trans students in an interview published in Neuron ( Wallis, 2021 ).…”

Section: Barriers To Women’s Academic Careersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lifting as we climb: Experiences and recommendations from women in neural engineering

Jantz

Mak²,

Dalrymple³

et al. 2023

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neural engineering is an emerging and multidisciplinary field in which engineering approaches are applied to neuroscience problems. Women are underrepresented in engineering fields, and indeed in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields generally. Underrepresentation of women is particularly notable at later academic career stages, suggesting that even though women are interested in the field, barriers exist that ultimately cause them to leave. Here, we investigate many of the obstacles to women’s success in the field of neural engineering and provide recommendations and materials to overcome them. We conducted a review of the literature from the past 15 years regarding the experiences of women in academic careers, as well as reports on the number of women in fields closely related to neural engineering from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). Additionally, we interviewed six women in neural engineering who are involved in initiatives and outreach concerning the inclusion and experiences of women in engineering. Throughout the literature and interviews, we identified common themes spanning the role of identity and confidence, professional relationships, career-related hurdles, and personal and professional expectations. We explore each of these themes in detail and provide resources to support the growth of women as they climb within the field of neural engineering.

show abstract

Visible name changes promote inequity for transgender researchers

Cited by 21 publications

References 6 publications

Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science

Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science

Gender disparities in authorship of invited submissions in high-impact psychology journals.

Lifting as we climb: Experiences and recommendations from women in neural engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About