Fewer women than men are asked to write in the leading scientific journals. That is established by two researchers from Lund University in Sweden, who criticise the gender bias.
In the 30 August issue of Nature, researchers have published an article showing that a much lower percentage of women than men are invited to write articles in News & Views in Nature and Perspectives in Science.
"We believe that fewer women than men are offered the career boost of invitation-only authorship in each of the two leading science journals" says Daniel Conley, a researcher at Lund University.
The consequences are that women are not as visible as men and are not provided the same opportunities for career advancement. The loss of women in science constitutes a brain drain for society.
When Nature was criticized in 2005 for offering too few women the opportunity to write for the Insight section, Nature increased the proportion of women authors.
"Gender parity can be achieved if Nature and Science are willing to make the effort to include more women in their invitation-only sections" says Johanna Stadmark, also from Lund University.
Conley and Stadmark conclude that equality within scientific research has increased in recent decades and that women today in many ways have the same opportunities as men to work within this field. However, they still believe that there is more to be done.
"Examination of the proportion of men and women who are invited to participate in all areas of science, whether it is as an invited speaker, a workshop participant, or for Science and Nature, is only good scientific practice" adds Daniel Conley.
Lund University: http://www.lu.se
This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.
Scientists who discovered phenomena as different as the molecular mechanisms of pain, organic light-emitting diodes that illuminate mobile phones and a new quantum state of matter are top contenders for Nobel prizes next month, according to an annual analysis by Thomson Reuters.
The way the National Institutes of Health doles out research grants accentuates booms and busts in the financing of scientific research. More variety in the length of grants could help.
History suggests that scientists opposition to ideological manipulation has often been feeble. Philip Ball argues that the failings are not individual but institutional
The prizewinning science of banana-skin slips, seeing Jesus in toast and dogs aligning themselves with magnetic fields lines when relieving themselves
Most Americans lack a basic understanding of science
Tired of waiting for a cure for breast cancer, a coalition of activists now leans hard on Congress to steer money to particular research projects. Critics say that approach may miss promising leads.
This year's winners include a cartoonist, a documentarian, a leader in the legal fight for gay marriage, a saxophonist, mathematicians and scientists, poets, lawyers and advocates.
So, you want to be a science professor? Good luck. Highly educated, relatively low-paid postdoctoral fellows may drive U.S. biomedical research, but they're training for jobs that don't exist.
New report makes familiar arguments, but authors hope policymakers will be more receptive this time around
As the Ebola epidemic demonstrates, the world is an ever more dangerous place, and wealthy democracies have a moral obligation to invest in less fortunate countries and to support a more stable and secure world. But neglecting science will be devastating in the long run