Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userWomen in academia: a warning on selection bias in gender studies from the astronomical perspective
69
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Maria Luiza Linhares Dantas
Publication date
2020
fields
Physics
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The recent paper by AlShebli et al. (2020) investigates the impact of mentorship in young scientists. Among their conclusions, they state that female proteges benefit more from male than female mentorship. We herein expose a critical flaw in their methodological design that is a common issue in Astronomy, namely selection biases. An effect that if not treated properly may lead to unwarranted causality claims. In their analysis, selection biases seem to be present in the response rate of their survey (8.35%), the choice of database, success criterion, and the overlook of the numerous drawbacks female researchers face in academia. We discuss these issues and their implications -- one of them being the potential increase in obstacles for women in academia. Finally, we reinforce the dangers of not considering selection bias effects in studies aimed at retrieving causal relations.
rate research
Read More
In an academic landscape where female physicists are still strongly underrepresented, underlying causes like unconscious gender bias deserve specific attention. Members of academia are often not aware of their intrinsic, hence unconscious, biases; this can have negative effects on students and staff at all career levels. At the Queens University Belfast, I have developed and conducted a workshop on unconscious gender bias awareness at the School of Mathematics and Physics. The first installment of the workshop was attended by 63 members of the School, among them 26 academic staff (lecturer level and above). Participants attended an informational talk followed by a discussion session, and then took part in the Harvard Implicit Association Test for association of gender with science. The participants self-reported their results and their previous expectations, followed by a group discussion. Here I present the observed magnitude of unconscious gender bias and summarise the discussion points of the participants. The outcomes that bias can have on the success of physics students as well as the careers of physicists in an academic context will be highlighted. Putting the results into context, I discuss steps forward to make physics a level playing field for all genders.
We present a study on the gender balance, in speakers and attendees, at the recent major astronomical conference, the American Astronomical Society meeting 223, in Washington, DC. We conducted an informal survey, yielding over 300 responses by volunteers at the meeting. Each response included gender data about a single talk given at the meeting, recording the gender of the speaker and all question-askers. In total, 225 individual AAS talks were sampled. We analyze basic statistical properties of this sample. We find that the gender ratio of the speakers closely matched the gender ratio of the conference attendees. The audience asked an average of 2.8 questions per talk. Talks given by women had a slightly higher number of questions asked (3.2$pm$0.2) than talks given by men (2.6$pm$0.1). The most significant result from this study is that while the gender ratio of speakers very closely mirrors that of conference attendees, women are under-represented in the question-asker category. We interpret this to be an age-effect, as senior scientists may be more likely to ask questions, and are more commonly men. A strong dependence on the gender of session chairs is found, whereby women ask disproportionately fewer questions in sessions chaired by men. While our results point to laudable progress in gender-balanced speaker selection, we believe future surveys of this kind would help ensure that collaboration at such meetings is as inclusive as possible.
We analyze the role of first (leading) author gender on the number of citations that a paper receives, on the publishing frequency and on the self-citing tendency. We consider a complete sample of over 200,000 publications from 1950 to 2015 from five major astronomy journals. We determine the gender of the first author for over 70% of all publications. The fraction of papers which have a female first author has increased from less than 5% in the 1960s to about 25% today. We find that the increase of the fraction of papers authored by females is slowest in the most prestigious journals such as Science and Nature. Furthermore, female authors write 19$pm$7% fewer papers in seven years following their first paper than their male colleagues. At all times papers with male first authors receive more citations than papers with female first authors. This difference has been decreasing with time and amounts to $sim$6% measured over the last 30 years. To account for the fact that the properties of female and male first author papers differ intrinsically, we use a random forest algorithm to control for the non-gender specific properties of these papers which include seniority of the first author, number of references, total number of authors, year of publication, publication journal, field of study and region of the first authors institution. We show that papers authored by females receive 10.4$pm$0.9% fewer citations than what would be expected if the papers with the same non-gender specific properties were written by the male authors. Finally, we also find that female authors in our sample tend to self-cite more, but that this effect disappears when controlled for non-gender specific variables.
Cultural products are a source to acquire individual values and behaviours. Therefore, the differences in the content of the magazines aimed specifically at women or men are a means to create and reproduce gender stereotypes. In this study, we compare the content of a women-oriented magazine with that of a men-oriented one, both produced by the same editorial group, over a decade (2008-2018). With Topic Modelling techniques we identify the main themes discussed in the magazines and quantify how much the presence of these topics differs between magazines over time. Then, we performed a word-frequency analysis to validate this methodology and extend the analysis to other subjects that did not emerge automatically. Our results show that the frequency of appearance of the topics Family, Business and Women as sex objects, present an initial bias that tends to disappear over time. Conversely, in Fashion and Science topics, the initial differences between both magazines are maintained. Besides, we show that in 2012, the content associated with horoscope increased in the women-oriented magazine, generating a new gap that remained open over time. Also, we show a strong increase in the use of words associated with feminism since 2015 and specifically the word abortion in 2018. Overall, these computational tools allowed us to analyse more than 24,000 articles. Up to our knowledge, this is the first study to compare magazines in such a large dataset, a task that would have been prohibitive using manual content analysis methodologies.
Human activities can be seen as sequences of events, which are crucial to understanding societies. Disproportional event distribution for different demographic groups can manifest and amplify social stereotypes, and potentially jeopardize the ability of members in some groups to pursue certain goals. In this paper, we present the first event-centric study of gender biases in a Wikipedia corpus. To facilitate the study, we curate a corpus of career and personal life descriptions with demographic information consisting of 7,854 fragments from 10,412 celebrities. Then we detect events with a state-of-the-art event detection model, calibrate the results using strategically generated templates, and extract events that have asymmetric associations with genders. Our study discovers that the Wikipedia pages tend to intermingle personal life events with professional events for females but not for males, which calls for the awareness of the Wikipedia community to formalize guidelines and train the editors to mind the implicit biases that contributors carry. Our work also lays the foundation for future works on quantifying and discovering event biases at the corpus level.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
