The intersectional privilege of white able-bodied heterosexual men in STEM

Centering voices of scientists from marginalized backgrounds to understand experiences in climate adaptation science and inform action

Identifying and building solutions to help people and ecosystems adapt to climate change requires participation of all people; however, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields, including environmental sciences, continue to lack diversity. To address this issue, many institutions have increased programming to recruit and retain people from historically marginalized backgrounds in STEM fields. Institutions use surveys to evaluate the experiences of community members and identify areas for improvement; however, surveys often summarize and reflect majority perspectives and disregard voices of historically marginalized individuals. In June 2021, a survey of graduate students, postdocs, faculty, staff, and researchers affiliated with the Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center (NE CASC) evaluated their experiences of diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) using Likert-based and long-answer questions. We analyzed the results as a whole, but also focused on the responses of people who self-identified as members of a marginalized group ("marginalized respondents") in climate adaptation science to center their voices. Marginalized respondents reported being motivated to enter climate adaptation science to improve society and the environment rather than for intellectual curiosity, which motivated one third of non-marginalized respondents. Once in science, marginalized respondents reported feeling less supported and comfortable at work and were more likely to have considered leaving science and academia in the last year. Long-answer responses of marginalized respondents indicated distrust in the ability of leadership and existing DEIJ initiatives to effectively tackle systemic issues and emphasized the importance of focusing on equity and inclusion before recruitment. Marginalized respondents identified additional funding to support existing DEIJ efforts and undergraduates as priorities. By allowing participants to self-identify as part of a marginalized group, we were able to highlight experiences and needs without risking exposure based on race, gender, disability status, or sexual orientation. This approach can be applied to other small organizations with limited demographic diversity.

Improving research and development of wearable assistive and rehabilitation technologies: a systematic review on diversity factors

This paper analyses diversity and intersectionality aspects in the R&D of wearable assistive and rehabilitation technologies (WEARTechs). We advocate for inclusive, innovative research that we hope will help bridge the gap between laboratories and the real world and reduce disparities in healthcare and technology development. We performed a systematic literature review of the intersections between assistive technologies and diversity and conducted a thematic analysis of the diversity factors identified in the literature. In addition, we carried out a supplementary literature search on WEARTechs to discover which, if any, diversity aspects are currently being reported on. Our findings indicate that diversity has not been addressed in the field of WEARTechs. There is not sufficient knowledge to determine, which diversity-related aspects researchers must consider when evaluating the performance of any specific WEARTech device. Nor about how these can be properly addressed in the R&D process. We, therefore, provide actionable recommendations on how to integrate diversity-relevant aspects at different R&D stages. We hope that our review will help scientists rethink and reformulate approaches to the R&D of WEARTechs and build the way towards more inclusive solutions. It is our belief that this will spark innovation and enhance discovery potential in the field.

Queer voices in computational biology: the first ISCB LGBTQI+ Symposium

The first ISCB LGBTQI+ Symposium, held during Pride Month in 2024, marked a significant milestone for the International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) community to promote diversity. This event aimed to provide a safe and supportive space for LGBTQI+ members of the society to share their experiences, address unique challenges in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, and foster strategies for creating an equitable environment within ISCB. Through keynote presentations, short talks, and a roundtable discussion, participants explored topics such as minority stress, visibility, and the impact of role models. The symposium was rooted in a recognition of the historical and ongoing marginalization faced by LGBTQI+ individuals and sought to challenge systemic barriers while emphasizing the importance of community and representation. This article details the journey behind organizing the symposium, including overcoming the challenges of ensuring inclusivity and privacy, and highlights the profound impact of role models and collective action in advancing LGBTQI+ equity in science.

Gender, Racial, and Academic Authorship Diversity in the Otolaryngology Clinical Trial Literature

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the state and trajectory of gender, racial, and academic authorship diversity in the otolaryngology clinical trial literature over the past 2 decades.

STUDY DESIGN

Bibliometric analysis.

SETTING

Otolaryngology clinical trial literature.

METHODS

Clinical trials published in the 9 major otolaryngology journals between 2000 and 2020 were included. The gender, race, and academic seniority of the first, senior, and corresponding authors were recorded for each trial. Multivariable regression models assessed the temporal trajectory of authorship diversity over time and the disparity in citations across author characteristics. Models adjusted for relevant confounders pertaining to publication environment and study design.

RESULTS

Among 2117 trials, first, senior, and corresponding authors have been predominantly White (60%-64%), male (76%-80%), and attending physicians (63%-69%). Trials led by Black (<1%) and Hispanic (<5%) authors were severely underrepresented. Over time, the representation of female (adj. β 0.8%, 95% CI [0.5%, 1.1%] per year), Asian (1.0% [0.7%, 1.3%] per year), and MD resident (0.4% [0.1%, 0.7%] per year) first authorship increased, but representation of female (0.2% [-0.1%, 0.5%] per year), Black (0% [-0.03%, 0.02%] per year), Hispanic (-0.2% [-0.33%, -0.02%] per year) senior authorship remained persistently low. Asian-led trials were cited significantly less compared to White-led trials even after adjusting for study design and publication year (aIRR 0.82 [0.73, 0.92]).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite promising signs of improving authorship diversity over time, persistent underrepresentation of female, Black, Hispanic senior authorship underscore the need for additional efforts to diversify the otolaryngology clinical science workforce.

Supporting social justice through equity-based actions for a sustainable future in animal genetics (at the 39th International Society for Animal Genetics Conference)

The 39th International Society for Animal Genetics conference (ISAG) was held for the first time in Africa under the theme 'Animal genetics for a sustainable future' in 2023. The conference convened scientists, policy makers, industry professionals, and students from interdisciplinary fields to share and discuss the latest developments in the space of animal genetics. Since its inception as a society, ISAG has sought to provide a platform advocating for a just and equitable future in animal genetics. At the 39th ISAG conference, this commitment towards furthering inclusion in animal genetic science was progressed with two new offerings to attendees. The first session guided discussions on the political, ethical, legal, socioeconomic, and cultural dynamics that present barriers to participating in and benefitting from the genomic and genetic science fraternity. This session also included principles of social justice, specifically equity, diversity, and inclusion, towards enacting fairness in an unfair world, and focused on constraints related to sustainability in animal genetics. The second session used the important tradition of storytelling to transfer knowledge and wisdom from experienced scientists to upcoming researchers. Experienced scientists shared lived experiences on educational and career paths, challenges, and opportunities, providing networking and opportunities for further mentoring. Here, we report on these equity-based actions and their relevance to address the urgent continent-specific and global disparities in animal genetics to move towards a sustainable future.

Collective dynamics behind success

Understanding the collective dynamics behind the success of ideas, products, behaviors, and social actors is critical for decision-making across diverse contexts, including hiring, funding, career choices, and the design of interventions for social change. Methodological advances and the increasing availability of big data now allow for a broader and deeper understanding of the key facets of success. Recent studies unveil regularities beneath the collective dynamics of success, pinpoint underlying mechanisms, and even enable predictions of success across diverse domains, including science, technology, business, and the arts. However, this research also uncovers troubling biases that challenge meritocratic views of success. This review synthesizes the growing, cross-disciplinary literature on the collective dynamics behind success and calls for further research on cultural influences, the origins of inequalities, the role of algorithms in perpetuating them, and experimental methods to further probe causal mechanisms behind success. Ultimately, these efforts may help to better align success with desired societal values.

How do Students' Science, Social, and Personal Identities Influence their Experiences in Undergraduate Field Biology Courses?

Field biology courses can be formative learning experiences that develop students' science identities. Yet, they can also pose challenges to students that may disaffirm their science identities-especially to those who identify with underrepresented, excluded, and minoritized groups. It is largely unknown how students' social (e.g., gender) and personal (e.g., where they grew up) identities intersect with their science identities in field biology courses. Therefore, we used the Expanded Model of Science Identity to determine: 1) the factors that influence students' science, social, and personal identities; and 2) whether and how these identities intersect in field biology courses. Using a card sorting task during semistructured interviews, we found variation in science identities with which students identified, mediated by social factors (e.g., social comparison). These social factors influenced how students' social and personal identities intersected with their science identities. Intersections between students' social and science identities were also facilitated by structural factors (e.g., privilege, lack of representation) that perpetuate inequities in field biology. Based on our findings, we offer suggestions to support welcoming, equitable, and inclusive field biology education that nurtures the science identities of all students.

Exploring the employment experiences of young adults with multiple minoritized identities: A qualitative study focusing on race and non-apparent disabilities

Youth with disabilities often encounter many challenges in securing employment. Although the common barriers that youth face are well documented, little is known about the experiences of youth who have multiple minoritized identities in finding and maintaining employment. Youth with disabilities who belong to racial minoritized groups may encounter ableism and racism and other forms of discrimination at work. Exploring the experiences of racial minoritized youth with non-apparent disabilities is important given the growing concern about social inequities that are linked to disadvantage and differential access to resources such as employment. We used a qualitative design involving semi-structured interviews with 19 youth (13 women, 3 non-binary, 3 men), aged 17-30 (mean 23.5 years). An inductive thematic analysis was applied to analyze the data. We identified the following themes: (1) challenges finding and maintaining employment; (2) the extent of safety and comfort with disclosing minoritized identities in the workplace (i.e., comfortable disclosing; uncomfortable disclosing; did not need to disclose and/or hiding identities); (3) workplace discrimination based on minoritized identities (i.e., ableism, racism, ableist racism, gendered ableism, racist and gendered ableism); (4) impact of discrimination (i.e., negative affective outcomes, social and work adjustment, impact on professional development) and coping strategies (i.e., advocacy, networking, peer support); and (5) advice for youth and employers. Our study highlights the extent of racism and ableism that racial minoritized youth with non-apparent disabilities experience in the workplace and the importance of rehabilitation clinicians supporting their inclusion.

Integrating open education practices with data analysis of open science in an undergraduate course

The open science movement produces vast quantities of openly published data connected to journal articles, creating an enormous resource for educators to engage students in current topics and analyses. However, educators face challenges using these materials to meet course objectives. I present a case study using open science (published articles and corresponding datasets) and open educational practices in a capstone course. While engaging in current topics of conservation, students trace connections in the research process, learn statistical analyses, and recreate analyses using the programming language R. I assessed the presence of best practices in open articles and datasets, examined student selection in the open grading policy, surveyed students on their perceived learning gains, and conducted a thematic analysis on student reflections. First, articles and datasets met just over half of the assessed fairness practices, which increased with the publication date. There was a marginal difference in how assessment categories were weighted by students, with reflections highlighting appreciation for student agency. In course content, students reported the greatest learning gains in describing variables, while collaborative activities (e.g., interacting with peers and instructor) were the most effective support. The most effective tasks to facilitate these learning gains included coding exercises and team-led assignments. Autocoding of student reflections identified 16 themes, and positive sentiments were written nearly 4x more often than negative sentiments. Students positively reflected on their growth in statistical analyses, and negative sentiments focused on how limited prior experience with statistics and coding made them feel nervous. As a group, we encountered several challenges and opportunities in using open science materials. I present key recommendations, based on student experiences, for scientists to consider when publishing open data to provide additional educational benefits to the open science community.

Gender Typicality and Engineering Attachment: Examining the Viewpoints of Women College Engineers and Variation by Race/Ethnicity

Women remain under-represented in many STEM occupations, including in the high-status and lucrative field of engineering. This study focuses on women who have chosen to enter this men-dominated field, to consider whether and how feelings of gender typicality predict their attachment to the field. Specifically, utilizing a U.S. sample of approximately 800 women college engineers from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds, we build on emerging research on gender typicality to distinguish perceptions of feminine typicality as well as masculine typicality. Subsequently, we consider whether these perceptions have implications for their attachment to engineering, including their engineering identity as well as their certainty of staying in the field. Importantly, in doing so, we consider potential racial/ethnic variations in these relationships.

Overcoming gender bias in STEM

Despite prevalent diversity and inclusion programs in STEM, gender biases and stereotypes persist across educational and professional settings. Recognizing this enduring bias is crucial for achieving transformative change on gender equity and can help orient policy toward more effective strategies to address ongoing disparities.

Few LGBTQ+ Science and Engineering Instructors Come Out to Students, Despite Potential Benefits

LGBTQ+ undergraduates have higher attrition from science and engineering (S&E) than straight and cisgender undergraduates and perceive that having LGBTQ+ instructors would benefit them. However, it is unknown how many S&E instructors are LGBTQ+, the extent to which they disclose this information to students, and how disclosure affects all students, both LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+. In study I, we surveyed 108 LGBTQ+ S&E instructors across the U.S. to explore the extent to which they reveal their LGBTQ+ identities across professional contexts and why they reveal or conceal their identities to undergraduates. Overall, 75% of instructors came out to at least some colleagues but only 48% came out to any undergraduates. Instructors most commonly chose to conceal LGBTQ+ identities from undergraduates because they perceived their identities to be irrelevant to course content and anticipated negative student reactions. In study II, 666 introductory biology undergraduates were randomly assigned to evaluate one of two identical teaching demonstration videos except the instructor revealed her LGBTQ+ identity in one but not the other. We assessed differences in students' impressions of the instructor across conditions. We found no differences in most ratings of the instructor except participants reported higher rapport with the instructor when she came out.

Organizational commitments to equality change how people view women's and men's professional success

To address women's underrepresentation in high-status positions, many organizations have committed to gender equality. But is women's professional success viewed less positively when organizations commit to women's advancement? Do equality commitments have positive effects on evaluations of successful men? We fielded a survey experiment with a national probability sample in Germany (N = 3229) that varied employees' gender and their organization's commitment to equality. Respondents read about a recently promoted employee and rated how decisive of a role they thought intelligence and effort played in getting the employee promoted from 1 "Not at all decisive" to 7 "Very decisive" and the fairness of the promotion from 1 "Very unfair" to 7 "Very fair." When organizations committed to women's advancement rather than uniform performance standards, people believed intelligence and effort were less decisive in women's promotions, but that intelligence was more decisive in men's promotions. People viewed women's promotions as least fair and men's as most fair in organizations committed to women's advancement. However, women's promotions were still viewed more positively than men's in all conditions and on all outcomes, suggesting people believed that organizations had double standards for success that required women to be smarter and work harder to be promoted, especially in organizations that did not make equality commitments.

Using reflective practice to support PhD students in the biosciences

Postgraduate study can be mentally, physically and emotionally challenging. The levels of anxiety and depression in postgraduate students are much higher than those in the general population, and isolation can also be a problem, especially for students who are marginalised due to gender, race, sexuality, disability or being a first-generation and/or international student. These challenges are not new, but awareness of them has increased over the past decade, as have efforts by institutions to make students feel supported. Under the umbrella of a Doctoral Training Partnership, we developed a programme in which reflective practice is employed to help postgraduate students navigate work environments, deal with difficult supervisory or professional relationships, and improve their work-life balance. Additionally, this reflective practice is allowing the training partnership to tailor support to its students, enabling them to effectively nurture our next generation of bioscientists.

Evolution of a self-renewing, participant-centered workshop series in BMB assessment

We present as a case study the evolution of a series of participant-centered workshops designed to meet a need in the life sciences education community-the incorporation of best practices in the assessment of student learning. Initially, the ICABL (Inclusive Community for the Assessment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology/BMB Learning) project arose from a grass-roots effort to develop material for a national exam in biochemistry and molecular biology. ICABL has since evolved into a community of practice in which participants themselves-through extensive peer review and reflection-become integral stakeholders in the workshops. To examine this evolution, this case study begins with a pilot workshop supported by seed funding and thoughtful programmatic assessment, the results of which informed evidence-based changes that, in turn, led to an improved experience for the community. Using participant response data, the case study also reveals critical features for successful workshops, including participant-centered activities and the value of frequent peer review of participants' products. Furthermore, we outline a train-the-trainer model for creating a self-renewing community by bringing new perspectives and voices into an existing core leadership team. This case study, then, offers a blueprint for building a thriving, evolving community of practice that not only serves the needs of individual scientist-educators as they seek to enhance student learning, but also provides a pathway for elevating members to positions of leadership.

STEM doctorate recipients with disabilities experienced early in life earn lower salaries and are underrepresented among higher academic positions

There is paucity of data examining disparities in salary and representation for disabled scientists, which is needed to advance inclusion and equity for people with disabilities in STEM. Using data from the 2019 Survey of Doctorate Recipients (United States, N = 1,148,817), we show that doctorate recipients working in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) with disabilities experienced early in life (at age <25 yr) earned US$10,580 less per year (95% CI: -$13,661, -$7,499) than non-disabled workers. In the subset of academic workers, doctorate recipients with early disabilities earned $14,360 less (95% CI: -$17,546, -$11,175) than those without disabilities. We observed an underrepresentation of academics with disabilities in higher faculty ranks (χ2: 647.2; P < 0.0001), among Deans/Presidents (χ2: 27.4; P = 0.0004) and among those with tenure (χ2: 525; P < 0.0001). These findings support a need to expand inclusion efforts, provide equal opportunities for career advancement and improve working conditions for people with disabilities in STEM.

Talent denied: Equity and excellence gaps in STEMM

In principle, there could be STEMM talent everywhere if there were sufficient and adequate opportunities and learning resources everywhere. The reality, however, is that the likelihood of developing one's talent in STEMM is tied to membership in social groups. In this contribution, we explore the implications of this statement with multiple examples for different social groups and for different stages of talent development. We propose an educational framework model for analyzing equity gaps in STEMM talent development that identifies and systematizes the unequal and inequitable distribution of resources and opportunities as the proximal cause of the emergence of such equity gaps. Furthermore, we discuss important aspects for closing equity gaps in STEMM talent development. We argue that-similar to public health approaches-the focus in establishing equity in STEMM talent development should be on prevention rather than intervention. We discuss the importance of the cooperation of societal subsystems and argue for the use of adequate methods of disparity detection for creating equal opportunities. We also outline why preventive strategies are crucial for the creation of resource parity and explain why outcome standards should be considered obligatory.

Stochastic modelling of intersectional pay gaps in universities

The gender and ethnicity pay gaps are well publicised for academics. The majority of research relies on observations representing a point in time or uses models to consider a standard academic lifespan. We use a stochastic mathematical model to ask what drives differences in lifetime earnings of university academics and highlight a new question: how best should we quantify a working lifetime? The model observes and accounts for patterns in age when entering and leaving the workforce, and differing salary trajectories during an academic career. It is parameterized with data from a national dataset in Aotearoa New Zealand. We compare the total lifetime earnings of different gender and ethnicity groups with and without accounting for the different lengths of time spent in academia. The lifetime earnings gaps are considerably larger when we account for different hiring and leaving ages. We find that overall, for every ethnicity, women have shorter careers and are more likely to leave academia. All minority ethnic groups-and women-earn considerably less than their male white, European colleagues.

Women drive efforts to highlight concealable stigmatized identities in U.S. academic science and engineering

Concealable stigmatized identities (CSIs) are hidden identities that carry negative stereotypes and can result in a loss of social status if revealed. Instructors often choose to conceal these CSIs due to anticipated negative student reactions, yet revealing CSIs can have a positive impact on undergraduates. Women are generally more likely to reveal personal aspects about themselves in social situations, but may face greater consequences for revealing a stigmatized identity to students given their already marginalized position in academic science and engineering. Therefore, in this study, we were interested in understanding to what extent there are differences between men and women science and engineering instructors in (i) the representation of CSIs, (ii) their decisions to reveal CSIs to undergraduates in their classes, and (iii) their perceived stigma of CSIs. Based on a national survey of over 2,000 instructors in science and engineering from very high research activity doctoral institutions, we found that women were more likely than men to report having depression, anxiety, or a disability. Of instructors who held CSIs, women had 1.5x higher odds than men of revealing their CSIs to some undergraduates compared to no undergraduates and perceived greater stigma associated with all CSIs. Despite perceiving greater stigma associated with concealable stigmatized identities, women are more likely to reveal their CSIs to college science and engineering students, leading the way to a more diverse and inclusive scientific community by demonstrating themselves as role models for these identities.

The impact of underrepresented minority or marginalized identity status on training outcomes of MD-PhD students

Dual-degree MD-PhD programs have historically lacked diversity of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and other facets of identity. Like MD- and PhD-granting programs, MD-PhD program training environments are also marked by structural barriers that negatively impact measurable academic outcomes of underrepresented and/or marginalized students in academic medicine (racial and ethnic minority groups considered underrepresented by the National Institute of Health, sexual and gender minorities, individuals with disabilities, and individuals of low socioeconomic status). In this article, we review the existing literature on MD-PhD program disparities affecting students from these groups and provide recommendations grounded on the reviewed evidence. Our literature review identified four generalizable barriers that can impact the training outcomes of students from these marginalized and/or underrepresented groups: 1) discrimination and bias, 2) impostor syndrome and stereotype threat, 3) lack of identity-similar mentors, and 4) suboptimal institutional policies and procedures. We propose goal-oriented interventions that may begin to ameliorate the disparities present in MD-PhD program training environments that affect students from marginalized and/or underrepresented groups in academic medicine.

A rapid review of challenges and opportunities related to diversity and inclusion as experienced by early and mid-career academics in the medicine, dentistry and health sciences fields

BACKGROUND

Early- and mid-career academics in medicine, dentistry and health sciences are integral to research, education and advancement of clinical professions, yet experience significant illbeing, high attrition and limited advancement opportunities.

OBJECTIVES

Identify and synthesise published research investigating challenges and opportunities related to diversity and inclusion, as experienced by early and mid-career academics employed in medicine, dentistry and health sciences disciplines.

DESIGN

Rapid review.

DATA SOURCES

OVID Medline, Embase, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL and Scopus.

METHODS

We systematically searched for peer reviewed published articles within the last five years, investigating challenges and opportunities related to diversity and inclusion, as experienced by early and mid-career academics employed in medicine, dentistry and health sciences. We screened and appraised articles, then extracted and synthesised data.

RESULTS

Database searches identified 1162 articles, 11 met inclusion criteria. Studies varied in quality, primarily reporting concepts encompassed by professional identity. There were limited findings relating to social identity, with sexual orientation and disability being a particularly notable absence, and few findings relating to inclusion. Job insecurity, limited opportunities for advancement or professional development, and a sense of being undervalued in the workplace were evident for these academics.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review identified overlap between academic models of wellbeing and key opportunities to foster inclusion. Challenges to professional identity such as job insecurity can contribute to development of illbeing. Future interventions to improve wellbeing in academia for early- and mid-career academics in these fields should consider addressing their social and professional identity, and foster their inclusion within the academic community.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SA4HX ).

Leveraging individual power to improve racial equity in academia

Academia in the United States continues to grapple with its longstanding history of racial discrimination and its active perpetuation of racial disparities. To this end, universities and academic societies must grow in ways that reduce racial minoritization and foster racial equity. What are the effective and long-lasting approaches we as academics should prioritize to promote racial equity in our academic communities? To address this, the authors held a diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) panel during the Society for Behavioral Neuroendocrinology 2022 annual meeting, and in the following commentary synthesize the panelists' recommendations for fostering racial equity in the US academic community.

Engineering Ableism: The Exclusion and Devaluation of Engineering Students and Professionals with Physical Disabilities and Chronic and Mental Illness

Background

The experiences of students and professionals with disabilities are routinely excluded from scholarly and policy debates about equity in engineering. Emergent research suggests that engineering is particularly ableist, yet systematic accounts of the possible exclusion and devaluation faced by engineers with disabilities are largely missing.

Purpose/Hypothesis

This paper asks, do engineers with disabilities have more negative interpersonal experiences in engineering classrooms and workplaces than those without disabilities? Utilizing a social relational model of disability, I hypothesize that engineers with physical disabilities and chronic and mental illness are more likely to experience exclusion and professional devaluation than their peers and, partly as a result, have lower persistence intentions.

Data/Methods

The paper uses survey data from 1,729 students enrolled in eight US engineering programs (ASEE Diversity and Inclusion Survey) and 8,321 US-employed engineers (STEM Inclusion Study Survey). Analyses use regression, mediation, and intersectional approaches.

Results

Consistent with expectations, engineering students and professionals with disabilities are less likely than their peers to experience social inclusion and professional respect at school and work. Students with disabilities are more likely to intend to leave their engineering programs and professionals with disabilities are more likely to have thought about leaving their engineering jobs compared to peers, and their greater risks of encountering interpersonal bias help account for these differences. Analyses also reveal intersectional variation by gender and race/ethnicity.

Conclusion

These results suggest that engineering harbors widespread ableism across education and work. The findings demand more scholarly attention to the social, cultural, and physical barriers that block people with disabilities from full and equal participation in engineering.

Non-White scientists appear on fewer editorial boards, spend more time under review, and receive fewer citations

Disparities continue to pose major challenges in various aspects of science. One such aspect is editorial board composition, which has been shown to exhibit racial and geographical disparities. However, the literature on this subject lacks longitudinal studies quantifying the degree to which the racial composition of editors reflects that of scientists. Other aspects that may exhibit racial disparities include the time spent between the submission and acceptance of a manuscript and the number of citations a paper receives relative to textually similar papers, but these have not been studied to date. To fill this gap, we compile a dataset of 1,000,000 papers published between 2001 and 2020 by six publishers, while identifying the handling editor of each paper. Using this dataset, we show that most countries in Asia, Africa, and South America (where the majority of the population is ethnically non-White) have fewer editors than would be expected based on their share of authorship. Focusing on US-based scientists reveals Black as the most underrepresented race. In terms of acceptance delay, we find, again, that papers from Asia, Africa, and South America spend more time compared to other papers published in the same journal and the same year. Regression analysis of US-based papers reveals that Black authors suffer from the greatest delay. Finally, by analyzing citation rates of US-based papers, we find that Black and Hispanic scientists receive significantly fewer citations compared to White ones doing similar research. Taken together, these findings highlight significant challenges facing non-White scientists.

Creating accessibility in academic negotiations

The process of evaluating and negotiating a tenure-track job offer is unstructured and highly variable, making it susceptible to bias and inequitable outcomes. We outline common aspects of and recommendations for negotiating an academic job offer in the life sciences to support equitable recruitment of diverse faculty.

Rethinking academia in a time of climate crisis

Addressing the climate crisis requires radical and urgent action at all levels of society. Universities are ideally positioned to lead such action but are largely failing to do so. At the same time, many academic scientists find their work impeded by bureaucracy, excessive competitiveness, and a loss of academic freedom. Here, drawing on the framework of "Doughnut Economics," developed by Kate Raworth, we suggest seven new principles for rethinking the norms of scientific practice. Based on these, we propose a call to action, and encourage academics to take concrete steps towards the creation of a flourishing scientific enterprise that is fit for the challenges of the 21st century.

Systemic racial disparities in funding rates at the National Science Foundation

Concerns about systemic racism at academic and research institutions have increased over the past decade. Here, we investigate data from the National Science Foundation (NSF), a major funder of research in the United States, and find evidence for pervasive racial disparities. In particular, white principal investigators (PIs) are consistently funded at higher rates than most non-white PIs. Funding rates for white PIs have also been increasing relative to annual overall rates with time. Moreover, disparities occur across all disciplinary directorates within the NSF and are greater for research proposals. The distributions of average external review scores also exhibit systematic offsets based on PI race. Similar patterns have been described in other research funding bodies, suggesting that racial disparities are widespread. The prevalence and persistence of these racial disparities in funding have cascading impacts that perpetuate a cumulative advantage to white PIs across all of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Breaking the silence around academic harassment

It is time to hold every member of the scientific community responsible and 'response able' in addressing/reporting academic harassment. Stop applauding academic stars on the podium prior to checking what is happening underneath!