Gender Diversity in a STEM Subfield – Analysis of a Large Scientific Society and Its Annual Conferences

  • Evgenia Shishkova
  • Nicholas W. Kwiecien
  • Alexander S. Hebert
  • Michael S. Westphall
  • Jessica E. Prenni
  • Joshua J. Coon
Commentary

Abstract

Speaking engagements, serving as session chairs, and receiving awards at national meetings are essential stepping stones towards professional success for scientific researchers. Studies of gender parity in meetings of national scientific societies repeatedly uncover bias in speaker selection, engendering underrepresentation of women among featured presenters. To continue this dialogue, we analyzed membership data and annual conference programs of a large scientific society (>7000 members annually) in a male-rich (~70% males), technology-oriented STEM subfield. We detected a pronounced skew towards males among invited keynote lecturers, plenary speakers, and recipients of the society’s Senior Investigator award (15%, 13%, and 8% females, respectively). However, the proportion of females among Mid-Career and Young Investigator award recipients and oral session chairs resembled the current gender distribution of the general membership. Female members were more likely to present at the conferences and equally likely to apply and be accepted for oral presentations as their male counterparts. The gender of a session chair had no effect on the gender distribution of selected applicants. Interestingly, we identified several research subareas that were naturally enriched (i.e., not influenced by unequal selection of presenters) for either female or male participants, illustrating within a single subfield the gender divide along biology-technology line typical of all STEM disciplines. Two female-enriched topics experienced a rapid growth in popularity within the examined period, more than doubling the number of associated researchers. Collectively, these findings contribute to the contemporary discourse on gender in science and hopefully will propel positive changes within this and other societies.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Gender diversity in STEM Conference participation Women in science Gender equality Scientific conference Speaker selection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support of NIH grants P41 GM108538 and R35 GM118110 (awarded to J.J.C.).

References

  1. 1.
    Casadevall, A., Handelsman, J.: The presence of female conveners correlates with a higher proportion of female speakers at scientific symposia. MBio. 5, 1–4 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Isbell, L.A., Young, T.P., Harcourt, A.H.: Stag parties linger: continued gender bias in a female-rich scientific discipline. PLoS One. 7, 2–5 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schroeder, J., Dugdale, H.L., Radersma, R., Hinsch, M., Buehler, D.M., Saul, J., Porter, L., Liker, A., De Cauwer, I., Johnson, P.J., Santure, A.W., Griffin, A.S., Bolund, E., Ross, L., Webb, T.J., Feulner, P.G.D., Winney, I., Szulkin, M., Komdeur, J., Versteegh, M.A., Hemelrijk, C.K., Svensson, E.I., Edwards, H., Karlsson, M., West, S.A., Barrett, E.L.B., Richardson, D.S., van den Brink, V., Wimpenny, J.H., Ellwood, S.A., Rees, M., Matson, K.D., Charmantier, A., dos Remedios, N., Schneider, N.A., Teplitsky, C., Laurance, W.F., Butlin, R.K., Horrocks, N.P.C.: Fewer invited talks by women in evolutionary biology symposia. J. Evol. Biol. 26, 2063–2069 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Simon, J.L., Morris, E.K.S., N.G.: Trends in women’s participation at the meetings of the association for behavior analysis: 1975–2005. Behav. Anal. 30, 181–196 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sardelis, S., Drew, J.A.: Not “pulling up the ladder”: women who organize conference symposia provide greater opportunities for women to speak at conservation conferences. PLoS One. 11, 1–20 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    BiasWatchNeuro. An online initiative of tracking gender makeup of invited speakers at scientific conferences in neuroscience. https://biaswatchneuro.com/ (accessed July 25, 2017)
  7. 7.
    For Gender Equity at Scholarly Conferences. Blog posts. http://forgenderequityatconferences.blogspot.com/ (accessed July 25, 2017)
  8. 8.
    Stop Gender Discrimination in Science. Petition by Profs. Emily Carter, Laura Gagliardi, Anna Krylov: https://www.change.org/p/scientific-community-stop-gender-discrimination-in-science (accessed July 25, 2017)
  9. 9.
    Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J., Handelsman, J.: Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 16474–16479 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martin, J.L.: Ten simple rules to achieve conference speaker gender balance. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, 10–12 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Favaro, B., Oester, S., Cigliano, J.A., Cornick, L.A., Hind, E.J., Parsons, E.C.M., Woodbury, T.J.: Your Science Conference should have a code of conduct. Front. Mar. Sci. 3, 103 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Casadevall, A.: Achieving speaker gender equity at the American Society for Microbiology General Meeting. Microbiol. Gen. Meet. 6, 2014–2016 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S.A., Montoya, A., Jiang, L.: Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychol. Bull. 142, Advance online publication (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Coleborn, J.: Mind the gender gap. Nature. 6, 22–24 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., Sugimoto, C.R.: Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science. Nature. 504, 211–213 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moss-Racusin, C.A., Rudman, L.: Disruptions in women’s self-promotion: the backlash avoidance model. Psych. Women Quart. 34, 186–202 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jones, T.M., Fanson, K.V., Lanfear, R., Symonds, M.R.E., Higgie, M.: Gender differences in conference presentations: a consequence of self-selection? Peer J. 2, e627 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ceci, S.J., Williams, W.M., Sumner, R.A., Defraine, W.C.: Do subtle cues about belongingness constrain women’s career choices? Psychol. Inq. 22, 255–258 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ceci, S.J., Ginther, D.K., Kahn, S., Williams, W.M.: Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychol. Sci. in the Public Interest. 3(15), 75–144 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mann, A., DiPrete, T.A.: Trends in gender segregation in the choice of science and engineering majors. Soc. Sci. Res. 42(6), 1519–1541 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Petersen, J., Hyde, J.S.: Gender-related academic and occupational interests and goals. Adv. Child Dev. Behav. 47, 43–76 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mann, A., Legewie, J., DiPrete, T.A.: The role of school performance in narrowing gender gaps in the formation of STEM aspirations: a cross-national study. Front Psychol. 25(6), 171 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    United States National Academy of Sciences: Beyond bias and barriers: fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. National Academies, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    National Science Foundation: Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation, Arlington (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bell, N.: Graduate enrollment and degrees: 1999 to 2009. Council of Graduate Schools, Washington, DC (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ceci, S.J., Williams, W.M.: Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 108, 3157–3162 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ceci, S.J., Williams, W.M.: Gender differences in math-intensive fields. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 19, 275–279 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Henley, M.M.: Women’s success in academic science: challenges to breaking through the ivory ceiling. Sociol. Compass. 9, 668–680 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Williams, W.M., Ceci, S.J.: National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 201418878 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society for Mass Spectrometry 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evgenia Shishkova
    • 1
  • Nicholas W. Kwiecien
    • 2
  • Alexander S. Hebert
    • 2
  • Michael S. Westphall
    • 2
  • Jessica E. Prenni
    • 3
  • Joshua J. Coon
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.The Department of Biomolecular ChemistryUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  2. 2.The Genome Center of WisconsinUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  3. 3.The Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  4. 4.The Department of ChemistryUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations