Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science

Agency Penalties From Taking Parental Leave for Women in Men-Dominated Occupations: Archival and Experimental Evidence

Organizations have started more progressively using and offering family benefits including parental leaves to address the issues of balancing work and family life. Although such leaves are fundamental for supporting, attracting, and retaining women, we examine whether such leaves may also inadvertently affect women's careers in occupations that overly value masculine traits, unless managed carefully. Drawing on the literature on gender stereotypes (micro factors) and occupation gender type (macro factors), we argue that longer (vs. shorter) parental leaves negatively affect women's work outcomes (i.e., annual income, salary recommendation, hireability, and leadership effectiveness) in men-dominated but not in women-dominated occupations because it lowers perceptions of women's agency. We find support for our hypotheses across three studies in the Australian context with an archival data set and two experiments. Our work shows that men-dominated organizational structures reinforce traditional gender stereotypes, whereas such reinforcement does not happen in women-dominated organizational structures. Our research equips leaders and organizations with insights into the unintended negative consequences of parental leave for women. This understanding serves as a crucial first step in developing strategies and programs to mitigate these effects, thereby supporting women in men-dominated occupations and fostering more inclusive and healthy workplaces.

Bibliometric comparison of Nobel Prize laureates in physiology or medicine and chemistry

The Nobel Prize is an annual honor awarded to the researchers who have made the greatest contribution to humanity with their work in the year in question. Nobel Prizes for physiology or medicine and chemistry most often have direct or indirect pharmacological relevance. In this study, we performed a bibliometric analysis of Nobel Prize laureates from 2006 to 2022. The parameters include the nationalities and age of the laureates, age at their productivity peaks, the research locations, the H-index, the age-adjusted H-index, and the number of citations and publications, and, for each parameter, a comparison of female and male award laureates. Men were much more often awarded the Nobel Prize than women. Surprisingly, women were younger than their male colleagues at the time of the award although the productivity peak was similar. There was a correlation between all publications and the H-index, which was slightly stronger for women than for men. The age-adjusted H-index showed no difference among genders. The USA were the country with the highest number of Nobel Prize laureates, both male and female. Overall, the bibliometric characteristics of male and female Nobel Prize laureates are similar, indicating that among the group of Nobel Prize laureates, there is no bias against women. Rather, the achievements of women are recognized earlier than those of men. The major difference is that the number of women becoming Nobel Prize laureates is much smaller than the number of men. This study provides a starting for future studies with larger populations of scientists to analyze disparities.

Gender differences, academic patenting, and tenure-track reform in China: Evidence from life sciences at elite universities

This study is the first to examine the gender gap in academic patenting among faculty members in Chinese universities, a critical issue for the sustainable development of scientific research and innovation. Using a unique dataset that includes the patenting activities and professional status of 1,836 faculty members in life science-related departments at 36 top Chinese universities, this research reveals an evolving landscape of patenting dynamics. The trend of male faculty members leading in the annual number of patent applications and patents granted has shifted among newly graduated faculty members. Female faculty submit and receive their first patent applications significantly earlier than male faculty. However, male faculty are more likely to be lead inventors, and this gender gap remains difficult to close, with female faculty more likely to be supporting inventors. This research is contextualized within the broader framework of China's university tenure reform and the growing presence of women in the life sciences. While progress is evident, the study uncovers persistent systemic barriers that prevent women from fully translating their research into patentable innovations. By identifying these social and institutional barriers, our study not only sheds light on the gender gap, but also suggests policy measures to promote gender equity in scientific innovation, making it a critical read for policymakers and academic leaders.

An investigation into gender distributions in scholarly publications among dental faculty members in Iran

BACKGROUND

Research on gender inequality is crucial as it unveils the pervasive disparities that persist across various domains, shedding light on societal imbalances and providing a foundation for informed policy-making.

AIM

To investigate gender differences in scientometric indices among faculty members in dental schools across Iran. This included overall data and speciality-specific data.

METHODS

The publication profiles of academic staff in all dental schools were examined using the Iranian Scientometric Information Database (ISID, http://isid.research.ac.ir). Variables analyzed were working field, academic degree, the total number of papers, papers per year, total number of citations, percentage of self-citation, h-index, g-index, citations per paper, gender, university type, number of years publishing, proportion of international papers, first-author papers, and corresponding-author papers. Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric tests were used to analyze the relationship between background characteristics and scientometric indicators. The extracted data were analyzed using R v4.0.1.

RESULTS

The database included 1850 faculty members, of which about 60% (1104 of 1850) were women. Men (n = 746) had a higher number of papers (6583 vs. 6255) and citations (60410 vs. 39559) compared with women; 234 of the 376 faculty members with no papers were women. Almost half of the women (N = 517 of 1104) were in Type 2 universities, and nearly half of the men (N = 361 of the 746) were faculty members at Type 1 universities (Type 1 universities ranking higher than Type 2 and 3 universities). The medians of scientometric indices were higher in men, except for self-citation percentage (0 (IQR = 2) vs. 0 (IQR = 3), P = 0.083), international papers percentage (0 (IQR = 7.5) vs. 0 (IQR = 16.7), P<0.001). The proportion of corresponding-author papers was more than 62% higher in women (25 (IQR = 50) vs. 15.4 (IQR = 40), P<0.001). Men had a two-fold higher median h-index (2 (IQR = 4) vs. 1 (IQR = 3), P<0.001). Restorative dentistry and pediatric dentistry had the highest men-to-women ratios (1.5 for both). Dental materials and oral and maxillofacial surgery showed the lowest men-to-women ratios (0.42 and 0.5, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Women made up the majority of dental faculty members in Iran. Nevertheless, men showed better scientometric results in several significant indices. Having identified scientometric information reflecting differences across faculty members, further research is now needed to better understand the drivers of these differences.

Study on the Analysis of Gender Trends Among the First Authors of Publications on Budd-Chiari Syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) is primarily a disease of hepatic vein blockage, which involves a backflow of blood to the liver. Although there have been many causes linked to this disease, most commonly, it occurs due to hypercoagulable states and blood disorders. In recent times, there has been a fast spread of knowledge regarding early diagnosis and various treatment modalities, which has enabled the prevention of mortality in most cases. This has primarily spread through research articles published in various journals. Thus, the article aims to compare the gender trend ratios to identify the associated discrepancies in terms of male and female author contributions who have been the primary authors for articles pertaining to this disease.  Methodology: A PubMed database between the years 2013 and 2022 was used for the bibliometric analysis. The gender of the primary author was analyzed by NamSor, an application programming interface (API). The statistical analysis was conducted using R software, the ARIMA model, and graphs were prepared using Datawrapper.

RESULTS

Out of 667 articles extracted, the analysis showed that there were 455 (68.2%) first male authors and 212 (31.8%) first female authors. We also formulated various other results, which depicted a higher female-to-male author ratio including various journals and different countries. Although there has been an increasing trend of male authors as compared to female authors, this study found that male authorship for research on this disease is still higher.

CONCLUSIONS

This study depicts that there is a necessity to draw attention to the inequitable systems favoring men over women for publications. The predictive analysis conducted also helps to foresee the trend in the next few years and explains the necessity of addressing the disparities among both genders in healthcare systems.

Female researchers are under-represented in the Colombian science infrastructure

Worldwide women have increased their participation in STEM, but we are still far from reaching gender parity. Although progress can be seen at the bachelor's and master's level, career advancement of women in research still faces substantial challenges leading to a 'leaky pipeline' phenomenon (i.e., the continuous decrease of women's participation at advanced career stages). Latin America exhibits encouraging rates of women participation in research, but the panorama varies across countries and stages in the academic ladder. This study focuses on women's participation in research in natural sciences in Colombia and investigates career progression, leadership roles, and funding rates by analyzing data on scholarships, grants, rankings, and academic positions. Overall, we found persistent gender imbalances throughout the research ecosystem that were significant using classical statistical analyses. First, although women constitute >50% graduates from bachelors in natural sciences, <40% of researchers in this field are female. Second, women win <30% of research grants, and in turn, their scientific productivity is 2X lower than that of men. Third, because of the less research funding and output women have, their promotion to senior positions in academic and research rankings is slower. In consequence, only ~25% of senior researchers and full professors are women. Fourth, the proportion of women leading research groups and mentoring young scientist in Colombia is <30%. Our study deepens our understanding of gender gaps in STEM research in Colombia, and provides information to design initiatives that effectively target gender disparities by focusing on key areas of intervention, and then gradually building up, rather than tackling structural inequities all at once.

Is there a gender gap in clinical neurosciences? A cross-sectional analysis of female participation in academic neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry

Gender equality or the lack thereof is a constantly recurring theme. Here, we sought to provide an overview of the status with respect to the participation and leadership of female doctors in clinical neuroscience analyzing different disciplines (neurosurgery, neurology and psychiatry). A total of 1910 articles published in six representative journals (07-12/2020) were reviewed. Of these, 1327 were original research papers, 145 invited publications and 303 letters/comments. Out of a total of 15,080 authors, 4365 (29%) were women. The percentage of female authors was found to differ significantly between the different specialties (19% in neurosurgery, 39% in neurology and 45% in psychiatry). Women were last authors in 9.5% of the papers in neurosurgery, 29% in neurology and 39% in psychiatry Based on these findings, it can be concluded that gender disparity in academic neuroscience is quite conspicuous. Our review seeks to address the reasons behind this phenomenon in the context of new publications as well as various cultural and historical underpinnings.

Gender inequality in cum laude distinctions for PhD students

Resource allocation in academia is highly skewed, and peer evaluation is the main method used to distribute scarce resources. A large literature documents gender inequality in evaluation, and the explanation for this inequality is homophily: male evaluators give more favorable ratings to male candidates. We investigate this by focusing on cum laude distinctions for PhD students in the Netherlands, a distinction that is only awarded to 5 percent of all dissertations and has as its sole goal to distinguish the top from the rest. Using data from over 5000 PhD recipients of a large Dutch university for the period 2011-2021, we find that female PhD students were almost two times less likely to get a cum laude distinction than their male counterparts, even when they had the same doctoral advisor. This gender gap is largest when dissertations are evaluated by all-male committees and decreases as evaluation committees include more female members.

Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda

Science is among humanity's greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions.

Unlocking Resilience: How Physical Literacy Impacts Psychological Well-Being among Quarantined Researchers

This study investigates the interplay between physical literacy, resilience, and burnout among researchers who experienced strict home quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic in China, with a particular focus on the mediating role of resilience. Employing a two-stage sampling procedure, a total of 363 researchers from diverse disciplines, notably social science and natural science, were enlisted and administered a series of validated scales, including the Perceived Physical Literacy Scale (PPL), the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10), and the Chinese version of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBL), via an anonymous online platform. The findings revealed substantial differences in physical literacy, resilience, and burnout across disciplines. Resilience partially mediated the relationship between physical literacy and burnout. Upon a closer examination of the sub-dimensions, resilience was found to fully mediate between factors of motivation, exhaustion, and disengagement. Moreover, one aspect of physical literacy-interaction with the environment-exhibited weaker correlations with both resilience and burnout compared to other dimensions of physical literacy. Overall, the study confirms the significant correlation between physical literacy and psychological parameters, establishing that elevated levels of both physical literacy and resilience serve as key factors in mitigating burnout during the pandemic.

Gender Disparities in First Authorship at Three Medical Universities in an Area Affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake

The Great East Japan Earthquake that occurred on March 11, 2011, was one of the largest natural disasters in modern times. Publication in medical journals is important aspects of the academic promotion process, and is thus important for all scientists. However, little is known about whether and how substantial natural disasters affect gender disparities in academic productivity in disaster-affected areas. We hypothesized that the Great East Japan Earthquake widened the existing disparities in scientific publishing between male and female researchers. To test this hypothesis, this retrospective observational study using existing databases was conducted. We extracted from the MEDLINE database all types of biomedical articles published from March 11, 2007, to March 11, 2015, by three medical universities in a disaster-affected area of Japan. Differences in the proportion of female first authorship during the 4 years before and after the Great East Japan Earthquake were compared. A total of 5,873 papers were analyzed. The proportion of female first authors significantly declined after the Great East Japan Earthquake (20.5% vs. 14.1%; odds ratio 0.64; 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.73). A similar trend was identified across all prespecified subgroups, including clinical department; original article; public medical university; and prestigious journal with impact factor >6. Reference data from two medical universities minimally affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake showed the opposite trend. These results collectively suggest that large natural disasters can reinforce existing gender disparities in first authorship in biomedicine.

How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought

Peer review plays an essential role as one of the cornerstones of the scholarly publishing system. There are many initiatives that aim to improve the way in which peer review is organized, resulting in a highly complex landscape of innovation in peer review. Different initiatives are based on different views on the most urgent challenges faced by the peer review system, leading to a diversity of perspectives on how the system can be improved. To provide a more systematic understanding of the landscape of innovation in peer review, we suggest that the landscape is shaped by four schools of thought: The Quality & Reproducibility school, the Democracy & Transparency school, the Equity & Inclusion school, and the Efficiency & Incentives school. Each school has a different view on the key problems of the peer review system and the innovations necessary to address these problems. The schools partly complement each other, but we argue that there are also important tensions between them. We hope that the four schools of thought offer a useful framework to facilitate conversations about the future development of the peer review system.

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.

Gender differences in animal cognition science

Women's representation in science is increasing steadily, with some fields closing gender parity in terms of participation and scientific output. Animal cognition appears to fall into that category. Our current analysis of gender author balance (women versus men) in 600 animal cognition papers supported parity in many aspects, but also revealed some remaining disparities. Women animal cognition scientists often held first authorship positions (58% of the studies), received similar numbers of citations, and published in equally high impact factor journals as men. Women were still under represented in last-author position, which often reflects seniority status (37% of last authors were women). There were interesting results when we considered the gender of teams (of two or more authors): all-women author teams were the minority in our dataset and received on average fewer citations than all men or mixed author teams, regardless of the quality of the journal (as measured by the journal's impact factor). Women more often focussed on mammals, whereas men more often focussed on fish, both as first authors and as same-gender teams. Men, as first author or in men-only teams, restricted their research more often to organisms of a single sex, compared to women, as first author and as members of a team. Our study suggests that there are many indices of the significant contribution of both women and men scientists in animal cognition, although some gender biases may remain.

COVID-19 retracted publications on retraction watch: A systematic survey of their pre-prints and citations

Background

Studies related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were frequently published as pre-prints prior to undergoing peer-review. However, several publications were later retracted due to ethical concerns or study misconduct. Although these studies have been retracted, the availability of their corresponding pre-prints has never been formally investigated, and may result in the spread of misinformation if they are being used to inform decision-making.

Methods

Our objective was to conduct a systematic survey of retracted COVID-19 publications listed on the Retraction Watch database as of August 15th, 2021. We assessed the availability of corresponding pre-prints for retracted publications, and documented the number of citations and online views.

Results

Our study included 140 retracted COVID-19 publications, and we could not retrieve corresponding pre-prints for 132 retracted publications in our study (94%). Although we were unable to find the majority of pre-prints, they had already been disseminated, with a maximal citation count of 593 and Altmetric score of 558,928.

Conclusion

While it is reassuring that most corresponding pre-prints could not be retrieved, our study highlights the need for online platforms and journals to employ quality assurance methods to prevent the spread of misinformation through citation of retracted papers.

Peer review perpetuates barriers for historically excluded groups

Peer review is central to the scientific process and scientists' career advancement, but bias at various stages of the review process disadvantages some authors. Here we use peer review data from 312,740 biological sciences manuscripts across 31 studies to (1) examine evidence for differential peer review outcomes based on author demographics, (2) evaluate the efficacy of solutions to reduce bias and (3) describe the current landscape of peer review policies for 541 ecology and evolution journals. We found notably worse review outcomes (for example, lower overall acceptance rates) for authors whose institutional affiliations were in Asia, for authors whose country's primary language is not English and in countries with relatively low Human Development Indices. We found few data evaluating efficacy of interventions outside of reducing gender bias through double-blind review or diversifying reviewer/editorial boards. Despite evidence for review outcome gaps based on author demographics, few journals currently implement policies intended to mitigate bias (for example, 15.9% of journals practised double-blind review and 2.03% had reviewer guidelines that mentioned social justice issues). The lack of demographic equity signals an urgent need to better understand and implement evidence-based bias mitigation strategies.

Gender distribution of editorial board members in critical care journals: Assessment of gender parity

PURPOSE

To reveal factors related to gender parity on editorial boards of critical care journals indexing in SCI-E.

METHODS

The genders were defined according to data obtained from journals' websites between 01-30 September 2022. Publisher properties and journal metrics were analyzed by using Chi-square, Fisher exact, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Spearman's correlation coefficient. Logistic regression analysis was used to reveal independent factors.

RESULTS

Women's representation on editorial boards was 23.6%. The USA (OR, 0.04, 95% CI, 0.01-0.15, p < 0.001) and Netherlands (OR, 0.04, 95% CI, 0.01-0.16, p < 0.001) as publisher's countries, an IF >5 (OR, 0.25, 95% CI, 0.17-0.38, p < 0.001), publication duration <30 years (OR, 0.09, 95% CI, 0.06-0.12, p < 0.001), multidisciplinary perspective of editorial policy (OR, 0.46, 95% CI, 0.32-0.65, p < 0.001), journals categorized also in nursing (OR, 0.38, 95% CI, 0.22-0.66, p < 0.001), and being a section editor (OR, 0.49, 95% CI, 0.32-0.74, p = 0.001) were associated with gender parity. Europe as a journal continent (OR, 36.71, 95% CI, 8.39-160.53, p < 0.001) was related to gender disparity.

CONCLUSIONS

Further efforts are needed to expand diversity policies in critical care medicine.

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.

A PowerPack of SuperScientists: An innovative concept by African scientists to address gender bias and inequity in science

Underrepresentation of women in scientific leadership is a global problem. To understand and counter narratives that limit gender equity in African science, we conducted a public engagement campaign. Scientists representing six sub-Saharan African countries and multiple career stages used superhero imagery to create a diverse and unified team advocating for gender equity in science. In contrast to many traditional scientific environments and global campaigns, this "PowerPack of SuperScientists" was led by early-career Black female scientists whose perspectives are often under-represented in discussions about gender equity in science. The superhero imagery served as a powerful and fun antidote to imposter syndrome and helped to subvert traditional power structures based on age, race and sex. In an interactive social media campaign, the PowerPack developed insights into three themes: a) cultural stereotypes that limit women's scientific careers, b) the perception of a "conflict" between family and career responsibilities for women scientists, and c) solutions that can be adopted by key stakeholders to promote gender equity in African science. The PowerPack proposed solutions that could be undertaken by women working individually or collectively and interventions that require allyship from men, commitment from scientific institutions, and wider societal change. Further work is required to fully engage African scientists from even more diverse and disadvantaged backgrounds and institutions in these solutions and to enhance commitment by different stakeholders to achieving gender equity in science. Our experience suggests that creative tools should be used to subvert power dynamics and bring fresh perspectives and urgency to this topic.

A PowerPack of SuperScientists: An innovative concept by African scientists to address gender bias and inequity in science

Underrepresentation of women in scientific leadership is a global problem. To understand and counter narratives that limit gender equity in African science, we conducted a public engagement campaign. Scientists representing six sub-Saharan African countries and multiple career stages used superhero imagery to create a diverse and unified team advocating for gender equity in science. In contrast to many traditional scientific environments and global campaigns, this “PowerPack of SuperScientists” was led by early-career Black female scientists whose perspectives are often under-represented in discussions about gender equity in science. The superhero imagery served as a powerful and fun antidote to imposter syndrome and helped to subvert traditional power structures based on age, race and sex. In an interactive social media campaign, the PowerPack developed insights into three themes: a) cultural stereotypes that limit women’s scientific careers, b) the perception of a “conflict” between family and career responsibilities for women scientists, and c) solutions that can be adopted by key stakeholders to promote gender equity in African science. The PowerPack proposed solutions that could be undertaken by women working individually or collectively and interventions that require allyship from men, commitment from scientific institutions, and wider societal change. Further work is required to fully engage African scientists from even more diverse and disadvantaged backgrounds and institutions in these solutions and to enhance commitment by different stakeholders to achieving gender equity in science. Our experience suggests that creative tools should be used to subvert power dynamics and bring fresh perspectives and urgency to this topic.

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.

Terms in journal articles associating with high quality: can qualitative research be world-leading?

Purpose

Scholars often aim to conduct high quality research and their success is judged primarily by peer reviewers. Research quality is difficult for either group to identify, however and misunderstandings can reduce the efficiency of the scientific enterprise. In response, we use a novel term association strategy to seek quantitative evidence of aspects of research that are associated with high or low quality.

Design/methodology/approach

We extracted the words and 2–5-word phrases most strongly associated with different quality scores in each of 34 Units of Assessment (UoAs) in the Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2021. We extracted the terms from 122,331 journal articles 2014–2020 with individual REF2021 quality scores.

Findings

The terms associating with high- or low-quality scores vary between fields but relate to writing styles, methods and topics. We show that the first-person writing style strongly associates with higher quality research in many areas because it is the norm for a set of large prestigious journals. We found methods and topics that associate with both high- and low-quality scores. Worryingly, terms associated with educational and qualitative research attract lower quality scores in multiple areas. REF experts may rarely give high scores to qualitative or educational research because the authors tend to be less competent, because it is harder to do world leading research with these themes, or because they do not value them.

Originality/value

This is the first investigation of journal article terms associating with research quality.

Higher research productivity = more pay? Gender pay-for-productivity inequity across disciplines

Gender pay equity for academics continues to be elusive. Adding to scholarship around structural barriers to gender equity in academic settings, we investigate the link between scholarly performance and compensation. We expect high research productivity to be differentially associated with compensation outcomes for men and women. Building on social role theory, we hypothesize that these relationships are contingent upon whether researchers are inside or outside of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Using the h-index, compensation, and researcher demographics for 3033 STEM and social and behavioral sciences (SBS) researchers from 17 R1 universities, we applied multilevel modeling techniques and showed that cumulative research productivity was more strongly related to compensation for men versus women researchers. However, these effects only held in STEM disciplines but not in SBS disciplines. Based on these results, we recommend that institutions consider changing how pay analyses are conducted and advocate for adding explicit modeling of scientific performance-compensation links as part of routine pay equity analyses.

Gender gaps at the academies

Historically, a large majority of newly elected members of the National Academy of Science (NAS) and the American Academy of Arts and Science (AAAS) were men. Within the past two decades, however, that situation has changed, and in the last 3 y, women made up about 40% of the new members in both academies. We build lists of active scholars from publications in the top journals in three fields-psychology, mathematics, and economics-and develop a series of models to compare changes in the probability of selection of women as members of the NAS and AAAS from the 1960s to today, controlling for publications and citations. In the early years of our sample, women were less likely to be selected as members than men with similar records. By the 1990s, the selection process at both academies was approximately gender neutral, conditional on publications and citations. In the past 20 y, however, a positive preference for female members has emerged and strengthened in all three fields. Currently, women are 3 to 15 times more likely to be selected as members of the AAAS and NAS than men with similar publication and citation records. The positive preference for women may be in part a reflection of concerns that women face higher barriers to publishing in top journals and may receive less credit for their work.

Gender equality in the Italian academic context. Results from the IGEA project

The Innovation for Gender Equality in Academia (IGEA) project is focused on the analysis of the gender composition in academia, on the identification of the health needs of the academic population and on the assessment of their organizational wellbeing, in order to promote equal working conditions and opportunities. The study, focused on the identification of health needs, involved the construction of an ad hoc questionnaire in order to collect the socio-demographic characteristics and the perception of working environment of the participants. Differences between males and females were evaluated by the Mann-Whitney test, and Pearson Chi-Square or Fisher exact tests as appropriate, highlighting significant differences between genders regarding the occurrence of anxiety, panic, irritation and annoyance related to work activities. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the perception of work-related anxiety/panic, showing a direct association with the difficulty in work performance and the work-related stress during the pandemic period, whereas, an indirect association was found with job satisfaction and the feeling of being appreciated by colleagues. Occupational stress can increase the risk of developing physical and mental conditions, also affecting work performance and absenteeism. It is therefore fundamental to plan targeted interventions, implement policies and specific actions, in order to avoid and reduce any differences related to gender.

Trends of women's authorship in an Iranian medical journal from 1999 to 2019

Author's gender is a potential factor in scientific publications. We evaluated the trends of authorship gender by focusing on women in an Iranian medical journal and followed two aims: A) Mapping gender trends in authorship positions; B) Drawing the patterns among authors. Our results showed that between 1999 and 2019, the role of women as first author was 26.7% and 54.9% (p < 0.05); as last authors 33.3% and 37.3% and as corresponding author 23.3% and 36.7%, respectively. Despite progresses made by women, they were not significantly successful as corresponding and last authors. Further researchers around the world can have similar focus and be useful in making decisions for equality issues.

The Impacts of the Molecular Education and Research Consortium in Undergraduate Computational Chemistry on the Careers of Women in Computational Chemistry

The Molecular Education and Research Consortium in Undergraduate Computational Chemistry (MERCURY) has supported a diverse group of faculty and students for over 20 years by providing computational resources as well as networking opportunities and professional support. The consortium comprises 38 faculty (42% women) at 34 different institutions, who have trained nearly 900 undergraduate students, more than two-thirds of whom identify as women and one-quarter identify as students of color. MERCURY provides a model for the support necessary for faculty to achieve professional advancement and career satisfaction. The range of experiences and expertise of the consortium members provides excellent networking opportunities that allow MERCURY faculty to support each other's teaching, research, and service needs, including generating meaningful scientific advancements and outcomes with undergraduate researchers as well as being leaders at the departmental, institutional, and national levels. While all MERCURY faculty benefit from these supports, the disproportionate number of women in the consortium, relative to their representation in computational sciences generally, produces a sizable impact on advancing women in the computational sciences. In this report, the women of MERCURY share how the consortium has benefited their careers and the careers of their students.

The Value of Peer Mentoring Networks for Developing Leaders and Inspiring Change

A peer-mentoring network, funded by the National Science Foundation ADVANCE program, profoundly impacted the career trajectory of five women chemistry faculty at predominantly undergraduate institutions. By providing each other support, encouragement, information, and accountability, we advanced our careers, became leaders in our own right, and implemented change at our institutions. To extend this benefit to more women STEM faculty, we have developed and implemented a model to support 74 faculty and administrators representing 51 institutions across the country.

Sticky steps and the gender gap: how thoughtful practices could help keep caregivers in science

Many fewer women than men hold senior academic positions, a widely recognized and increasing problem. Our goal is to identify effective and feasible solutions. We begin by providing an in-depth assessment of the drivers of this gender inequity. In our synthesis of existing data, we provide many lines of evidence highlighting caregiving as a primary main factor. This is not a 'new' insight per se, but a point worth repeating that we back up by a strong and synthetic body of recent data. We also believe that our analysis provides a step forward in tackling a complex issue. We then develop a more detailed understanding of the challenges academic caregivers face and discuss whether and why it is important to keep caregivers in science. We find that the attrition due to caregiving should not be seen as a factor but rather as a process with multiple 'sticky steps' that eventually drive caregivers out of science-which, as we argue, is partly also good news. Indeed, it is here that we believe actions could be taken that would have a real impact: for example, one could effectively increase and expand upon current funding practices that focus on caregiver career advancement.

The Latin America Early Career Earth System Scientist Network (LAECESS): addressing present and future challenges of the upcoming generations of scientists in the region

Early career (EC) Earth system scientists in the Latin America and the Caribbean region (LAC) have been facing several issues, such as limited funding opportunities, substandard scientific facilities, lack of security of tenure, and unrepresented groups equality issues. On top of this, the worsening regional environmental and climatic crises call for the need for this new generation of scientists to help to tackle these crises by increasing public awareness and research. Realizing the need to converge and step up in making a collective action to be a part of the solution, the Latin America Early Career Earth System Scientist Network (LAECESS) was created in 2016. LAECESS's primary goals are to promote regional networking, foster integrated and interdisciplinary science, organize soft skills courses and workshops, and empower Latin American EC researchers. This article is an initial step towards letting the global science community grasp the current situation and hear the early career LAC science community's perspectives. The paper also presents a series of future steps needed for better scientific and social development in the LAC region.

Conflicting 'mother-scientist' roles. An innovative application of basket analysis in social research

The article discusses the issue of career and motherhood of female scientists, which is part of a broader thematic area known as Work-Life Balance. The theoretical part refers to the social role theory and the mutual influence of work and career on family and motherhood. The situation of women scientists is presented, for whom fulfilling the role of a mother is an important, although natural barrier on the road to a scientific career. Previous analyses present in the literature revealed that for the vast majority of mothers-scientists, motherhood is a factor that significantly delays their plans related to the development of a scientific career. The paper presents the results of empirical research conducted on the basis of classical academic methodology. Then, based on the data obtained from 334 mothers-scientists, an innovative, multidisciplinary experiment using data mining solutions was conducted, to answer the research question: Is the basket analysis tool able to find possible correlations between the factors characterising the respondents, and the types and dimensions of conflict occurring between scientific career and motherhood they experience? The paper shows that, according to the study results, most respondents declare they indeed experience the conflict between the roles of a mother and a scientist. The most frequently declared dimension of the conflict is the time-related one, then subsequently the emotional dimension, and lastly the financial dimension; many scientists declare they experience more than one dimension of conflict. Lastly, the basket analysis tool objectively confirmed the occurrence of correlations between the factors characterising the respondents and the types and dimensions of conflict occurring between scientific career and motherhood.

Nobel and novice: Author prominence affects peer review

Peer review is vital for research validation, but may be affected by “status bias,” the unequal treatment of papers written by prominent and less-well-known authors. We studied this bias by sending a research paper jointly authored by a Nobel Prize laureate and a relatively unknown early career research associate to many reviewers. We varied whether the prominent author’s name, the relatively unknown author’s name, or no name was revealed to reviewers. We found clear evidence for bias. More than 20% of the reviewers recommended “accept” when the Nobel laureate was shown as the author, but less than 2% did so when the research associate was shown. Our findings contribute to the debate of how best to organize the peer-review process.

Peer review is a well-established cornerstone of the scientific process, yet it is not immune to biases like status bias, which we explore in this paper. Merton described this bias as prominent researchers getting disproportionately great credit for their contribution, while relatively unknown researchers get disproportionately little credit [R. K. Merton, Science 159, 56–63 (1968)]. We measured the extent of this bias in the peer-review process through a preregistered field experiment. We invited more than 3,300 researchers to review a finance research paper jointly written by a prominent author (a Nobel laureate) and by a relatively unknown author (an early career research associate), varying whether reviewers saw the prominent author’s name, an anonymized version of the paper, or the less-well-known author’s name. We found strong evidence for the status bias: More of the invited researchers accepted to review the paper when the prominent name was shown, and while only 23% recommended “reject” when the prominent researcher was the only author shown, 48% did so when the paper was anonymized, and 65% did when the little-known author was the only author shown. Our findings complement and extend earlier results on double-anonymized vs. single-anonymized review [R. Blank, Am. Econ. Rev. 81, 1041–1067 (1991); M. A. Ucci, F. D’Antonio, V. Berghella, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM 4, 100645 (2022)].

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.

Outstanding women psychologists mainly from Europe – What helped and what limited them in their scientific careers? Guidelines for gender equity programs in academia

The manuscript is based on a series of structured interviews with female scientists from around the world who have made significant contributions to psychology and have an impact on their cultural areas. The authors interviewed female scientists and researchers from a similar age group, but from different regions of the world, to capture the factors influencing careers of interlocutors from a similar period and enabling cultural inference. Both the universal and the cultural barriers faced by female scientists/researchers in career development and the factors that have contributed to success in psychology are discussed. Universal and cultural factors served in this manuscript as a guideline for gender equality programs in academia to overcome gender stereotypes, support early career development, support women in reaching leadership positions, and enhance women’s visibility.

Belief traps: Tackling the inertia of harmful beliefs

Beliefs can be highly resilient in the sense that they are not easily abandoned in the face of counterevidence. This has the advantage of guiding consistent behavior and judgments but may also have destructive consequences for individuals, nature, and society. For instance, pathological beliefs can sustain psychiatric disorders, the belief that rhinoceros horn is an aphrodisiac may drive a species extinct, beliefs about gender or race may fuel discrimination, and belief in conspiracy theories can undermine democracy. Here, we present a unifying framework of how self-amplifying feedbacks shape the inertia of beliefs on levels ranging from neuronal networks to social systems. Sustained exposure to counterevidence can destabilize rigid beliefs but requires organized rational override as in cognitive behavioral therapy for pathological beliefs or institutional control of discrimination to reduce racial biases. Black-and-white thinking is a major risk factor for the formation of resilient beliefs associated with psychiatric disorders as well as prejudices and conspiracy thinking. Such dichotomous thinking is characteristic of a lack of cognitive resources, which may be exacerbated by stress. This could help explain why conspiracy thinking and psychiatric disorders tend to peak during crises. A corollary is that addressing social factors such as poverty, social cleavage, and lack of education may be the most effective way to prevent the emergence of rigid beliefs, and thus of problems ranging from psychiatric disorders to prejudices, conspiracy theories, and posttruth politics.

Gender parity and homophily in the Drug and Alcohol Dependence editorial process

BACKGROUND

Despite efforts towards gender parity and some improvement over time, gender bias in peer review remains a pervasive issue. We examined gender representation and homophily in the peer review process for Drug and Alcohol Dependence (DAD).

METHODS

We extracted data for papers submitted to DAD between 2004 and 2019, inclusive. Inferred gender was assigned to handling editors and reviewers using the NamSor gender inference Application Programming Interface (API).

RESULTS

Men and women handling editors were approximately equally likely to invite women reviewers over time, with only a few exceptions. Over time, 47.1% of editors were women, and 42.6% of review invitations were sent to women. Men were largely consistent over time in their likelihood of accepting a review invitation, while the likelihood of women accepting a review invitation was more variable over time. Gender differences in rates of accepting a review invitation were minimal; however, as women approached half of all invited reviewers in recent years, there has been a greater trend for women, relative to men, to decline review invitations. Evidence of homophily on the part of reviewers accepting invitations was minimal, but in certain years, a tendency to accept review invitations at higher rates from editors of the same gender was observed.

DISCUSSION

Given the benefits of diversity in scientific advancement, these results underline the importance of continuing efforts to increase gender diversity among editors and in reviewer pools, and the need for reviewers to be mindful of their own reviewing practices.

Under pressure: The extent and distribution of perceived pressure among scientists in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland

While it has been stressed repeatedly that academics nowadays have come to face extensive pressure, the extent and distribution of pressure to publish and to secure third-party funding has not been systematically investigated on a large scale. Based on the Zurich Survey of Academics, a representative large-scale web survey among academics working at universities in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (DACH region), which measures perceived pressure using six-point Likert scales, this article examines the extent and distribution of pressure to publish and to attract external funding. Specifically, we examine differences in perceived pressure across countries, disciplines, types of higher education institutions, sociodemographic characteristics (academic status, age, gender, relationship status, number of children), and working conditions (non-tenured/tenured, time available for research). It is shown that researchers in the DACH region feel a high level of pressure, with the pressure to publish being slightly greater than the pressure to attract external funding. The results also suggest that perceived pressure is not evenly distributed among countries and groups of academics. Specifically, the results suggest that (1) more secure and permanent (tenured) positions should be created and (2) the high-performance culture should be addressed in at least some disciplines if excessive pressure is to be alleviated. The findings also suggest that further investments should be made (3) to promote equal career opportunities for women and men and (4) to ensure that scientists have sufficient time for their research and are not too occupied with other responsibilities, such as teaching or administrative duties.

Interview with an avatar: Comparing online and virtual reality perspective taking for gender bias in STEM hiring decisions

Virtual perspective taking can reduce unconscious bias and increase empathy and prosocial behavior toward individuals who are marginalized based on group stereotypes such as age, race, or socioeconomic status. However, the question remains whether this approach might reduce implicit gender bias, and the degree to which virtual immersion contributes to behavioral modulation following perspective taking tasks is unknown. Accordingly, we investigate the role of virtual perspective taking for binary gender using an online platform (Study 1) and immersive virtual reality (Study 2). Female and male undergraduates performed a simulated interview while virtually represented by an avatar that was either congruent or incongruent with their own gender. All participants rated a male and a female candidate on competence, hireability, likeability, empathy, and interpersonal closeness and then chose one of these two equivalently qualified candidates to hire for a laboratory assistant position in the male dominated industry of information technology. Online perspective taking did not reveal a significant influence of avatar gender on candidate ratings or candidate choice, whereas virtual reality perspective taking resulted in significant changes to participant behavior following exposure to a gender-incongruent avatar (e.g., male embodied as female), such that men showed preference for the female candidate and women showed preference for the male candidate. Although between-group differences in candidate ratings were subtle, rating trends were consistent with substantial differences in candidate choice, and this effect was greater for men. Compared to an online approach, virtual reality perspective taking appears to exert greater influence on acute behavioral modulation for gender bias due to its ability to fully immerse participants in the experience of (temporarily) becoming someone else, with empathy as a potential mechanism underlying this phenomenon.

Trait Stereotypes of Scientists as Analytical and Cold Align With Perceptions of Men More Than Women on Both Implicit and Explicit Measures

Previous work using implicit tasks has demonstrated associations at a categorical level between men and science-related words (e.g., chemistry, physics, engineering). The current research explores trait attributes, examining the overlap in trait stereotypes of scientists with trait stereotypes of men and women, using both implicit and explicit stereotyping measures. Study 1 identified traits stereotypically associated with scientists along the analytic and cold dimensions, and counterstereotypic traits on unquestioning and warm dimensions. Study 2 demonstrated strong gender-scientist stereotypes on both explicit and implicit measures such that men were seen as more analytic and cold and less unquestioning and warm than women. Although robust effects were observed on both types of measures, their correlation was weak and nonsignificant. The misfit between trait perceptions of scientists and women, whether measured implicitly or explicitly, suggests trait stereotypes help maintain the gender imbalance in physical science fields.

Expert voices in South African mass media during the COVID-19 pandemic

Scientists increasingly recognise that media visibility allows them to gain influence in public and policy spheres. However, some scientists shy away from publicity and journalists are purposefully selective when they seek out experts to interview. This may result in a skewed representation of scientists in the mass media. In this study, we explored which South African scientific experts at the academic rank of ‘professor’ were quoted in the local mass media during the initial 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analysis of 1164 media articles related to COVID-19 showed that, as far as gender is concerned, men dominated as expert sources, with women accounting for only 30% of quoted professors. In terms of research field, most experts were from the broad field of health and medicine, with an under-representation of social scientists. We reflect on the implications and consequences of a skewed media representation of scientific expertise, as well as some of the options to remedy these imbalances.

Bruins-in-Genomics: Evaluation of the impact of a UCLA undergraduate summer program in computational biology on participating students

Recruiting, training and retaining scientists in computational biology is necessary to develop a workforce that can lead the quantitative biology revolution. Yet, African-American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, Native Americans, and women are severely underrepresented in computational biosciences. We established the UCLA Bruins-in-Genomics Summer Research Program to provide training and research experiences in quantitative biology and bioinformatics to undergraduate students with an emphasis on students from backgrounds underrepresented in computational biology. Program assessment was based on number of applicants, alumni surveys and comparison of post-graduate educational choices for participants and a control group of students who were accepted but declined to participate. We hypothesized that participation in the Bruins-in-Genomics program would increase the likelihood that students would pursue post-graduate education in a related field. Our surveys revealed that 75% of Bruins-in-Genomics Summer participants were enrolled in graduate school. Logistic regression analysis revealed that women who participated in the program were significantly more likely to pursue a Ph.D. than a matched control group (group x woman interaction term of p = 0.005). The Bruins-in-Genomics Summer program represents an example of how a combined didactic-research program structure can make computational biology accessible to a wide range of undergraduates and increase participation in quantitative biosciences.

Further Divided Gender Gaps in Research Productivity and Collaboration during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Coronavirus-related Literature

Based on publication data on coronavirus-related fields, this study applies a difference in differences approach to explore the evolution of gender inequalities before and during the COVID-19 pandemic by comparing the differences in the numbers and shares of authorships, leadership in publications, gender composition of collaboration, and scientific impacts. We find that, during the pandemic: (1) females’ leadership in publications as the first author was negatively affected; (2) although both females and males published more papers relative to the pre-pandemic period, the gender gaps in the share of authorships have been strengthened due to the larger increase in males’ authorships; (3) the share of publications by mixed-gender collaboration declined; (4) papers by teams in which females play a key role were less cited in the pre-pandemic period, and this citation disadvantage was exacerbated during the pandemic; and (5) gender inequalities regarding authorships and collaboration were enhanced in the initial stage of COVID-19, widened with the increasing severity of COVID-19, and returned to the pre-pandemic level in September 2020. This study shows that females’ lower participation in teams as major contributors and less collaboration with their male colleagues also reflect their underrepresentation in science in the pandemic period. This investigation significantly deepens our understanding of how the pandemic influenced academia, based on which science policies and gender policy changes are proposed to mitigate the gender gaps.

Predoctoral MD-PhD grants as indicators of future NIH funding success

MD-PhD trainees constitute an important source of physician-scientists. Persistence on this challenging path is facilitated by success in garnering independent (R grant) support from the NIH. Published research tracks academic appointments and global R01 success for MD-PhD trainees but has not included information on future funding success of individual MD-PhD predoctoral grant holders. Here, we used data from the NIH RePORTER database to identify and track the funding trajectory of physician-scientists who received predoctoral grant support through the F30 mechanism, which is specific for dual-degree candidates. Male and female F30 awardees did not differ in their success in garnering K (postdoctoral training) grants, but, among F30 grant awardees, men were 2.6 times more likely than women to receive R funding. These results underscore the need for analysis of factors that contribute to the disproportionate loss of NIH-supported female physician-scientists between the predoctoral F30 and the independent R grant-supported stages.

The Place of Gender Stereotypes in the Network of Cognitive Abilities, Self-Perceived Ability and Intrinsic Value of School in School Children Depending on Sex and Preferences in STEM

Adolescents face many barriers on the path towards a STEM profession, especially girls. We examine the gender stereotypes, cognitive abilities, self-perceived ability and intrinsic values of 546 Russian school children from 12 to 17 years old by sex and STEM preferences. In our sample, STEM students compared to no-STEM have higher cognitive abilities, intrinsic motivation towards math and science, are more confident in their math abilities and perceive math as being easier. Boys scored higher in science, math and overall academic self-efficacy, intrinsic learning motivation and math's importance for future careers. Meanwhile, girls displayed higher levels of gender stereotypes related to STEM and lower self-efficacy in math. A network analysis was conducted to identify the structure of psychological traits and the position of the stem-related stereotypes among them. The analysis arrived at substantially different results when adolescents were grouped by sex or preference towards STEM. It also demonstrated that gender stereotypes are connected with cognitive abilities, with a stronger link in the no-STEM group. Such stereotypes play a more important role for girls than boys and, jointly with the general self-efficacy of cognitive and academic abilities, are associated with the factors that distinguish groups of adolescents in their future careers.

Investigation of STEM Subject and Career Aspirations of Lower Secondary School Students in the North Calotte Region of Finland, Norway, and Russia

This study investigates the suitability of the STEM Career Interest Survey (STEM-CIS) to measure secondary school students’ aspirations towards STEM subjects and careers. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the initial structural validity of the adapted STEM-CIS survey, where the science subscale was extended to four science disciplines, to align with the way science is taught in Finland and Russia. The results indicate that the interest in STEM subjects in general is not at a high level in any of the countries. There is a traditional gender gap regarding STEM subjects in every dimension, which favors females in biology and males in technology and engineering. STEM stereotypes among students—due to low exposure to STEM professions at school—can explain students’ low interest despite high self-efficacies. Our study shows that we must increase informal learning opportunities inside and outside school and improve career counselling for students so that they will be more informed of STEM career opportunities.