13.2 C
Byron Shire
July 7, 2022

Women scientists are less likely to be credited for their work

Latest News

Value of the intangible and Suffolk Parks future

It’s hard to know what value to place on the environment – until it changes irrevocably.  A place is defined...

Other News

Bike path? 

Byron Councillors please note: A painted line on the side of the road is NOT a (safe) bike path. Paul...

Letters to the editor

The Echo loves your letters and is proud to provide a community forum on the issues that matter most...

Road workers strike first time in decades

Road workers, construction crews and other Transport for NSW workers will walk off the job for the first time in decades on Thursday, as frustrations over the NSW Government's effective pay cut boil over.

The ‘Court of Public Opinion’

The corona investigative committee is moving forward. Time is needed to assimilate the proceedings of this very important investigation,...

Flood help information from Chinderah, and Uki to South Golden Beach

The floods in February and March are still having direct impacts on the lives of many people and Serice NSW has a trailer coming to a location near you so you can easily access flood assistance.

Active Fest and Olympics heading to Byron

Want a fun day of netball, rugby league, soccer, skateboarding, BMX, baseball 5, or tennis? The Active Fest is coming to the Cavanbah Centre in Byron on July 14.

Although women represented over 48% of the scientific workforce within the dataset, they comprised less than 35 per cent of the authors – a significant underrepresentation.

Brought to you by Cosmos Magazine and The Echo

Gender gap in publication and patent authorship suggests women’s contributions to science are ignored or unappreciated.

Women are significantly less likely than men to be credited as authors on scientific publications, a new study published in Nature has found. The US-based research suggests that women’s scientific work tends to go ignored or unappreciated.

The study examined administrative data, including job titles and grants, from 9,778 research teams across 36 US universities from 2013 to 2016. These data were matched to authorship on scientific journal articles and patents. The final dataset included 128,859 individuals, 39,426 journal articles and 7,675 patents.

Although women represented over 48 per cent of the scientific workforce within the dataset, they comprised less than 35 per cent of the authors – a significant underrepresentation. Women were also less likely than their male colleagues to be named on patents.

More impactful scientific papers – those that were cited by other scientists in the field – showed a more pronounced gender gap. For example, women were almost 20 per cent less likely than men to be named on an article with 25 citations when controlling for scientific field, career position and team size.

Read more: Gender equity in science

While some of this gap can be attributed to the fact that women in science tend to be employed in more junior positions than men, women in each career position (research staff, postdocs and faculty) were still significantly less likely to receive authorship than expected based on their representation within research teams.

To further understand these patterns, the research team surveyed a sample of 871 scientists about their experiences with authorship. Among the respondents, approximately 43 per cent of women and 38 per cent of men stated that they had been excluded from authorship on a paper they had contributed to.

The most common reported reason for exclusion, cited by approximately 49 per cent of women and 39 per cent of men, was that the individual’s scientific contributions were underestimated by others. Women were significantly more likely than men to report that they had been excluded from authorship due to bias or discrimination.

Read more: Meet 10 women with great science ideas

The results suggest a nuanced interpretation of previous findings that women scientists tend to publish less than male colleagues.

“Some of the well-documented ‘productivity’ gap may not be a gap in the contribution of women to science at all, but rather a gap in how much their contributions are recognised,” the study authors write.

“While we focus here on gender, these gaps were also reported in our survey for other marginalised groups,” they add.

As the data were drawn only from research-intensive universities in the US, more research would clarify whether these patterns apply more widely.


This article was originally published on Cosmos Magazine and was written by Matilda Handsley-Davis. Matilda is a science writer at Cosmos. She holds a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Science (Honours) from the University of Adelaide.

Published by The Echo in conjunction with Cosmos Magazine.


Support The Echo

Keeping the community together and the community voice loud and clear is what The Echo is about. More than ever we need your help to keep this voice alive and thriving in the community.

Like all businesses we are struggling to keep food on the table of all our local and hard working journalists, artists, sales, delivery and drudges who keep the news coming out to you both in the newspaper and online. If you can spare a few dollars a week – or maybe more – we would appreciate all the support you are able to give to keep the voice of independent, local journalism alive.

3 COMMENTS

  1. I read the ‘study’, and it’s the ‘gender pay gap’ fallacy all over again.
    To add to that, there are more female junior staff, this is because they are hired over straight white males to meet quoters.

    It goes like this…. Girls aren’t naturally into STEM, so we have to encourage them to do it => Oh no! They aren’t doing so well, we have to hire more of them in to compensate => Oh no, we are being less productive, let’s get some diversity in => Oh no, they are not doing so well, we have to get more of them to compensate => Oh no, we are being less productive, let’s get some LGBTQ diversity in => Oh no, they are not doing so well, we have to get more of them to compensate => Oh no, all the misogyny, racism, and transphobia is causing the straight white males to invent all the stuff like they have been for centuries, we’ll just have to get rid of them. And that’s how you get ‘safe and effective’, planes that auto-crash themselves, and bridges that collapse onto traffic before you even put any weight on them.

    Just go back to meritocracy. You won’t like how the demographics will shake out, but productivity and reproducibility will go back to what they once were. R & D hubs are not social experiments.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Where is the love?

I have lived in Mullum and the surrounding hills for 35 years.  Yesterday I drove to Upper Main Arm, to Kohinur, to visit a friend,...

Flood help information from Chinderah, and Uki to South Golden Beach

The floods in February and March are still having direct impacts on the lives of many people and Serice NSW has a trailer coming to a location near you so you can easily access flood assistance.

Weaving through NAIDOC

DJ and Delta with some of the Weaving for Reconciliation exhibits. Photo Jeff Dawson.

Management of Byron’s fragile coastline impeded by NSW government: report

Insufficient funding and guidance from the State government is inhibiting Byron Council’s attempt to effectively manage its famous but fragile coastline, a Council report has revealed.