Our Picks for October 2nd!

Happy fall! Here's what we've been reading this week.

1) Indira Raman writes a PowerHour-inspired essay about what power means in academic science and who has it. This essay explores how inevitable power differentials can be embraced in building healthy relationships and a thriving scientific community.

2) In light of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, everyone is talking about who is to blame for accepting his donations, or general bad behavior at universities. Virginia Valian argues that we should not be too quick to give ourselves a break--there are ways we could all take responsibility for making the academy a better work environment.

3) This article by Troy Vettese made its rounds in the summer, but we haven't posted it yet. It's a well-cited exploration of why women continue to be so underrepresented in academia.

4) Donica Belisle and Kiera Mitchell take a historical look at credit in academic scholarship and how women, particularly the wives of male scholars, were overlooked: "it was common during this time for married scholars to work together as a team, but for the male spouse only to receive credit." 😱

In other news:
-Postdocs: apply for the HHMI Hana H Gray Fellowship!
-On that note, if you want feedback on your fellowship applications, join us on PWN Slack! E-mail us at professionalwomensnexus@gmail.com for an invite!
-UMass Amherst hires Buju Dasgupta to run a network to increase diversity in STEM.
-Melinda Gates pledges $1 billion to promote gender equality. 🤑

Selected articles for this week

As always, we try to bring you the latest news and studies surrounding issues women face in STEM and academia. In hopes to start these conversations and make progress to a more equal environment, we hope you find these posts helpful.

As members of the STEM community, we want to see the data! BBC News recently reviewed an article titled: Gender equality: 'No room at the top for women scientists.' Although women make up nearly 50% of all undergraduate and graduate students, disparate representation occurs at higher rungs of the academic ladder due to issues of harassment, limited opportunities, and exclusion.

Additionally, a nice paper from Nature reports that Committees with implicit biases promote fewer women when they do not believe gender bias exists. Previous research has relied on self-reporting when it comes to the controversial representation of women, which omits the very possible influence of implicit bias, while the current article analyzed real-world applications. In an effort to combat these gender biases, another Nature paper offers some insight on How to ban manels and manferences from scientific meetings.

One very real example of the exclusion of women can be found in Forbes's recently published '100 Most Innovative Leaders.' And of those 100, guess how many were women? One. Just 1 out of 100. How can this be? Read on here to learn more about how companies and institutions are taking more steps at becoming self-aware.

On the flip-side, a great win for women can be found in AAAS If/Then Ambassadors initiative. One hundred and twenty-five women across the United States were selected to take part in this opportunity in which they will connect with students both in person and through various channels of social media to promote. The goal for this initiative is to provide role models who represent the diverse array of STEM careers and opportunities that exist in all facets of life -- from entertainment to academia. 

Thanks for stopping by!

Our picks for Sep 6th!

Welcome back everyone! 

We hope you had a relaxing summer, and are ready to start a productive and fun academic year. For all our readers in the South of the US, we hope hurricane season is not causing too much trouble and everybody is safe. 

Below what we have been reading during the break: 

In this preprint, authors examined how gender and nationality impact peer-review at all levels (author, editor and peer-reviewers). They analyzed peer-review outcomes of all of the submissions to the journal eLife between 2012 and 2017, and showed that mixed-gender reviewers teams lead to more equitable outcomes, whereas the likelihood of accepting a paper increases if the gatekeepers (editor and reviewers) share the same country than the authors. On this topic, NPP published a follow up study on gender balance and journal function. It highlights NPP's efforts to increase mindfulness of gender balance in journal function and presents the latest data on women representation at NPP. In addition, this preprint brings to light the persistent under-representation of science led by women in high profile journals. The study spanned 15 high-profile multidisciplinary and neuroscience journals for 2005-2017. Similarly, this study established a bias against female instructors' ratings by students compared to male instructors, and how statements about implicit bias can slightly help prevent this inclination.

In this article, author Dr. Tina M. Iverson briefly exposes her experience applying for grants using her full name or only her initials, and how the rate of successful applications drastically change (up to 5 fold variation) as a function of her name being gender neutral or not...

During the summer, this article became viral on #AcademicTwitter. In it, post-doctoral fellow at Harvard University's Weatherhead Center, Dr. Troy Vettese, explains how sexism is prominent at all levels of Academia. The piece is a long read, but the level of detail and meticulous research makes the message even more powerful...and daunting. Highly recommended. 

Outside of Academia, this article published in The Guardian dives deep into the difference between genders regarding "me time" and how this can deeply impact creativity and productivity.

To celebrate Women's Equality Day (celebrated in the US on August 26), PEW Charitable Trusts asked female scientists their opinion on what is needed to recruit and retain the next generation of female scientists. Some of their responses might surprise you! 

Catch up with us next week for more articles on #WomenInSTEM.

Our Picks for July 5th!

Hello everyone, 

We hope you enjoyed July 4th with family and friends! We share below our latest picks for the summer, before taking a break and coming back strong in the fall. Please keep sending job opening opportunities, publications, grants, or any other successes to professionalwomensnexus@gmail.com, we will be happy to share with the PWN community! 

In this article published in the Chronicle of Higher Education, author Lee Gardner reflects on the changes and initiatives that come along when women take on leadership roles in colleges.

This summer, take time to read Reinvented Magazine created by Caeley Looney, an aerospace engineer who aims to inspire young girls to pursue a career in STEM.

Enjoy the summer and see you in the fall!

This Week's Picks

Happy Summer, everyone!

We're always talking about the under-representation of women in science. But what is fueling this gender imbalance? Marshall Shepherd, PhD, hones in on 5 Ways Society Sabotages Girls' Interest in Science and Math. I really loved this piece, but to summarize, we first have "Imagery." How are children molded by the toys and activities marketed to them? Real quick, do a Google search (I just did). No, really do it, it'll be eye-opening. What do you see when you search for "toys for girls"? The very first thing I see is a kitchen, followed by a makeup kit, and household appliances like a pink sewing machine, hair dryer, vacuum, and so on. What about "toys for boys"? Well, I see trucks, a tool box, dinosaurs, Legos -- toys that are designed to encourage curiosity about the natural world, cause-and-effect, logic, and critical thinking.  Think about how easy it is to internalize the messages children receive when boys have toys that are inherently tied to scientific endeavors while girls have toys that reinforce "traditional" gender roles in which they are charged with domestic duties. So, even from a young age, women are being implicitly told "science is not for you."

Building off of this internalization, Dr. Shepherd lists "self-fulfilling prophecy." So, you have this deeply ingrained idea that because you are a woman, science and math are just not your strong suit. So, why bother, if you're only going to fail? Going into science and math classes with this notion detrimentally affects women's performance in these applications, leading to this self-fulfilling prophecy. You already go in feeling defeated, so you don't apply yourself, leading to a poor outcome. Furthermore, how are you meant to overcome these feelings, if you have no mentorship for young women?

While it can be empowering to see women becoming more and more involved in STEM, once we're there, there is this invisible, but ever-present feeling of having to prove something. Women are underrepresented in science, and now you're a woman in science -- now it's your job to overcome any perceived stereotypes. Prove you're not like the "others!" All eyes are on you now, as you clearly speak and act on behalf of all women! Hopefully the sarcasm is coming through here, but consider this strange phenomenon of women doing their jobs in STEM and having people be surprised!  Lastly, are we conveying the value of STEM? Just like with the above mentioned marketing of toys to boys and girls, are we conveying the importance of science to underrepresented populations like women? How can we personalize STEM, make it applicable for everyone? Consider reading the full piece to see how this all ties together.

Here is an external example of the obstacles women face -- a recent study asserts that Male principal investigators (almost) don't publish with women in zoology and ecology. The paper explores the patterns in publishing between men and women scientists in these fields. While research groups led by women had 60% female co-authors, only 20% female co-authors were found when the research group was led by men. The authors of this analysis demonstrate that this is yet another possible way in which women do not continue in STEM fields.

In our effort to combat gender inequality in STEM, institutions are trying to find ways to settle this imbalance. But are these efforts genuine and fruitful? Or is this endeavor just becoming another item to "check off"? Charikleia Tzanakou asserts that this should not just be a matter of quantity, but quality. What kind of diversity can be found in women? What are these Unintended consequences of gender-equality plans?

Thanks for stopping by!

Our Picks for June 14th!

This week we have some bad news and some good news! Don't worry, the bad news isn't necessarily all bad -- it's good that these issues are being brought to light. We'll start with the bad and end on a happy note!

The bad news

Why aren't we doing research on female mice?

Dr. Rebecca Shansky, a professor at Northeastern Univeristy, points out that lots of studies use exclusively male mice and points out that, well, this doesn't really make any sense. The argument has always been that female hormones will cause too much variation between animals. But, as Shansky points out, that's kind of a bogus argument because, um, males have hormones, too. Read more about it in the links.

Black and Latinx women face double the bias when applying to postdocs

A new study using the old trick of distributing CVs with the same qualifications but different names demonstrated that faculty hiring postdocs in physics showed an extra large amount of bias against Black and Latinx women. Faculty rated female-sounding names as less competent than male-sounding names, and they rated Black and Latinx women as even less competent than their white or Asian female counterparts. Read more about it here.

Other bad news:

-60% of male managers say they feel uncomfortable working with women in light of #MeToo
-Male characters on children's TV shows use STEM skills to solve problems, whereas female characters use magic
-A Stanford professor fired over sexual misconduct blames he behavior on "different cultural norms" (yes, another professor, same excuse)

The good news

Celebrate Women in STEM!

We're coming up on the 50th anniversary of the first moon landing. Is the first moon-landing-related scientist that comes to your mind Neil Armstrong? Change that by reading about these women who helped us land on the moon and about pioneering women in STEM today!

Support Women in STEM!

Earth and Space Science news brings us actionable strategies to support women in STEM! We recommend sharing them with your male colleagues in STEM, too!

Other good news:
-The NIH director released a statement against manels (i.e., all-male panels)!
-Women today say you can really have it all
-The fraction of women authors on medical research papers is increasing!
-The CEO of the Girl Scouts tells us how to advance women in tech
-Modern tech is making education more accessible!

This week's picks

I'm sure a lot of us have done animal research (I'm still in the thick of it). Utilizing animals in research allows for us to model various pathologies observed in humans and help answer questions we wouldn't be able to answer using human subjects alone. But there's a major problem -- a lot of this research is being done primarily in male laboratory animals. Why is this a problem? Well, males and females can experience health issues differently -- so results from experiments utilizing only male subjects may not generalize to females. An example of this in human research is found in a recent New York Times article describing that although half of HIV patients are females, most research subjects are men. How can we be sure that clinical trials that are validated only in men can be effective in women?

When experiments are not run in females, we simply do not know how females react or experience various conditions. Often times, researchers point to the fact that females have hormonal fluctuations that make it difficult analyze experimental results reliably. But is this really a valid reason to omit females from research? Dr. Rebecca Shansky wrote an excellent piece on this subject entitled "Are hormones a 'female problem' for animal research?"

Keeping the theme of inclusivity, check out the Equity in STEM Community Convening. This is a great opportunity to meet like-minded scientists who are interested in helping the STEM community become more diverse and inclusive moving forward. After all, progress in science doesn't happen as a result of stagnancy!

A topic that will surely come up at this meeting is the topic of motherhood. Women in STEM already face plenty of challenges in the field as a marginalized group, but consider how much more complicated things get when you factor in the idea of motherhood. The STEM field is only just getting adjusted to having women around in the first place, now we have to consider the idea of accommodating mothers! But is it really just "motherhood?" Is being a parent only a woman's issue? What kind of changes need to happen concerning the topic of motherhood and work? Read on in this article to find out more.

Thanks for stopping by!

May 25 picks!

Hello everyone, 

We hope you had an interesting and productive week! Our team read the articles below: 

In this piece, Dr. Aarthi Gobinath (neuroscientist studying how stress differently affects male and female brains, @aarthigobinath) discusses the importance of including female subjects in research, and how the lack of consideration of sex differences explains sub par treatment results for women. 

A while ego, we highlighted in this blog the initiative "Request a Women Scientist", aiming to decrease the under representation of women in scientific panels, meetings and boards by providing a list of women scientists worldwide in all fields (if you are not on it, go join a pod!!). We were happy to read in this article that 11 months following its creation in January 2018, the database racked up a list of researchers from 174 different scientific disciplines in 133 countries. The progression of this initiative was recently published in PLoS Biology.

Receiving funding to perform research is one of the pillars of Academia. This article describes how language used in grant proposals is different between men and women applicants, and how that difference causes an imbalance resulting in men receiving more funding even when the review was blinded.

This thought-provoking commentary by Christine Middleton (associate editor at Physics Today)  reflects on the Katie Bouman/black hole controversy, and argues that the media focuses too much on looks when describing women scientists.

See you next week!

This week's picks

Hello everyone!

For those of you in academia, happy end of the semester!

If you're an educator, you may have noticed a disparity in your student population. This article by the Washington Post delves into the question as to why black and Latino students drop out of STEM majors at higher rates than their white peers. Perhaps one way to circumvent this disparate tendency is for institutions to take advantage of the Inclusive Excellence initiative by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. This initiative allows for up to 30 schools to apply for grants to help promote diversity and inclusivity within their STEM programs. Is your institution on the list? If not, perhaps you can apply!

Speaking of inclusivity, there is always more to learn when it comes to how women fare in the STEM world. A recent paper highlighted that only 10% of children will depict a woman when asked to draw a scientist. Although 10% isn't particularly high, consider that in previous decades, this statistic was  only 1%! In order to combat this kind of perception, the organization 500 Women Scientists has compiled a database called Request a Woman Scientist so that women scientists will have more representation when it comes to public speaking events, consultations, or having their voice heard in the media. A recent study surveyed the women in this database, and one of the authors, Elizabeth McCullagh, sat down with Laboratory Equipment for an interview about this recent study investigating the effects Request a Woman Scientist has had.

We're always talking about inclusivity, and interventions to promote diversity in STEM, but what if there are unintended consequences, good or bad? This article in Psypost discusses potential negative consequences that come with these kinds of interventions.

Lastly, if you're looking to join an organization, consider checking out NEURONEXXT, a network for women in neuroscience.

Thanks for stopping by!

Our Picks for May 1, 2019

Show Me the Data: Studies on Bias and Sexual Harassment

Does Bias Training Fix Bias?

According to a new study in PNAS, bias training has limited effects on bias. They found that bias training aimed at preventing gender and racial bias had positive effects on attitudes of both men and women. However, bias training did not seem to have large effects on behavior, especially in men. This data suggests that if we want to get rid of bias, we need to do more than just one-off bias trainings!

Sexual Harassment Drives Women out of Physics

A recent study showed that almost 3/4 of undergraduate physics majors experience sexual harassment. They further show that experiencing sexual harassment decreases the likelihood that women stay in physics, decreases the feeling of belonging and increases imposter syndrome. For a good summary of the study and its context, see this piece by Julie Libarkin.

Thoughts, Observations, and News on Women in Science

Erika Jefferson asks where the black women leaders are in science. In 2017, only 5% of managerial STEM jobs were held by black women--we need to do better! One way to improve these numbers is to train black women in STEM to be leaders. And Jefferson has started Black Women in Science and Engineering (BWISE), a mentoring organization to do just that -- check it out!

Christine Liu asks whether the focus on imposter syndrome as a problem that's all in our heads is keeping us from changing what really causes it: a toxic environment.

The National Academy of Sciences has a plan to remove members convicted of sexual harassment.

Our picks this week

In case you encounter anyone who says that gender bias/discrimination in science is a novel occurrence, and that it's never been an issue before, show them this article by the New York Times. This article outlines the experiences of senior women scientists at revered institutions, like the Salk Institute, who describe an atmosphere of marginalization and hostility throughout their years of service. Whether is was restricted access to resources, funding, or even the size of their laboratories, these women scientists found roadblock at every turn. Dr. Nancy Hopkins recalls a time where she was measuring the dimensions of the laboratories in her building to find that hers was 500 square feet smaller than the average male junior faculty and 1,500-4,500 square feet smaller than her fellow male full professors! When requesting more space (not that it should matter, but only 200 square feet!), the faculty member in charge refused to listen to her argument or view the data she collected. If you're getting push-back on something as simple as allocating appropriate laboratory space imagine the issues faced when trying to access larger scale resources like salary, funding, and promotions.

To read on about the difficulties women face in science and how it has evolved over the last few decades, click here. The number of overall women entering STEM fields is increasing, but these numbers waver when we consider minorities. There is also an issue with retention -- so even though we have made progress, there is still much to be done.

With the first image of a black hole plastered all over the internet, and even transformed into memes, you've probably encountered the name Dr. Katie Bouman, who played a significant role in making this major achievement possible. She entered the spotlight when her candid reaction to viewing a black hole for the first time went viral. It was an exciting eureka moment, meant to highlight an achievement that she and her team had worked so hard to develop. However, like everything on the internet, the narrative got twisted. The idea of the "lone genius" was ascribed to Dr. Bouman. This label is usually given to men -- the idea of that reclusive genius, working tirelessly in the corner by themselves, removed from the world, and solely responsible for their breakthroughs. As scientists, we all know this is rarely, if ever, the case. Science is possible through teamwork -- everyone contributes to a project, a hypothesis, a result. While this reality is rarely considered when a man has been labeled as a lone genius, when the internet attributed this breakthrough to Dr. Bouman, who "single-handedly" created the algorithm for the blackhole image, suddenly everyone is a detective and started questioning how much she was truly involved. Dr. Bouman never claimed to be solely responsible for the algorithm, and even publicly stated that it was a team effort. Still, she faces backlash, claims of "fraud" and threats. All of this because of a picture featuring her excitement about her work. Read on about this story here.

Don't forget to follow us on Twitter!

Our picks for April 13, 2019

In this article, author Dr. Kate Nautiyal reflects on the results of a recent study published in PNAS reporting that half of new mothers leave full-time STEM work-force within a year of becoming a mother. The author considers the principal reasons this is the case and touches on the recent efforts taken by the NIH to push more family-friendly initiatives.

   

This article published in Forbes lists 10 strategies to promote the advancement of women in science. It summarizes the discussions that took place at the Symposium Highlighting Evidence-Based Interventions for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering and Medicine held by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM).

Last week, #ScienceTwitter was taken by storm by Dr.  Kay M. Tye's blog post, Gender Bias From A Woman In Science. In this article, Dr. Tye shares personal experiences and shocking comments from male colleagues she received throughout her career, proving the point that gender bias in science is very real. She also reflects on how to move forward and help improve the situation. A recommended read! In addition to Dr. Tye's blog post, Dr. May R. Berenbaum, editor-in-chief of the journal PNAS, looks back to the disparities between male and female contributions to the journal throughout history.
Moreover, #MeTooSTEM founder Dr. BethAnn McLaughlin gave an interview to The Guardian. She discusses the movement she launched, the solutions the scientific community should consider and how leadind the #MeTooSTEM movement impacted her career.

If you plan to organize or are involved in the organization of a scientific meeting in the near future, this guide might interest you. It walks you through the actions you can take to make the meeting as inclusive as possible. Similarly, the CUWFA (College and University Work-Life-Family Association) offers online resources to facilitate the integration of work and study with family/personal life at institutions of higher learning.

It is now accepted that preteen years are critical for girls, who often drop STEM-oriented classes around that age. The initiative Snap The Gap, led by LittleBits, Disney, UC Davis and MWM-CA, focuses on "instill every ten-year old girl in the United States with the courage, confidence, and tools needed to become tomorrow’s changemakers."

Duke's University news journal The Chronicle published an article on The Percentage Project, an initiative aiming to measure and describe the minority experiences in science and engineering. This project surveyed 164 Duke engineering and computer science students from a variety of backgrounds.The disparities between male and female students are striking, as shown in the figure below. 

Despite the lack of funding and recognition, black female founders constitute the fastest-growing group of entrepreneurs today. In this article, author Monique Greenwood chats with women of color in business about their personal stories and the reason of their success.

And we couldn't finish the week without mentioning the the first picture of a black hole you have seen all over the news, courtesy of Dr. Katie Bouman. We are thrilled to see the wave of recognition for this young #WomenInScience.

Postdoctoral position available!!

A postdoctoral position is open in the laboratory of Dr. Sade Spencer in the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. The research program in our lab is dedicated to understanding the trajectory of neuroplasticity, neurochemistry and behavior associated with drug addiction as a relapsing remitting brain disorder. Our research is guided by several overarching questions including: (1) What are the neural substrates responsible for the comorbidity between substance use disorders and affective disorders (2) How does repeated relapse alter the neural substrates for natural and drug reward? (3) Moreover, how do we leverage this knowledge to inform more effective treatment strategies?  We use a combination of behavioral (operant drug self-administration, conditioned place preference and aversion, elevated plus maze), neurochemical (in vivo microdialysis, HPLC), and microscopy techniques along with chemogenetic and optogenetic manipulations. 

For this position we are seeking a highly motivated candidate with complementary experience in studying drugs of abuse or with relevant technical experience and a strong interest in the field. The successful candidate will join a highly interactive pharmacology and neuroscience community and will work as part of a team that includes members of other laboratories in the Medical Discovery Team on Addiction at the University of Minnesota.  A recent Ph.D. degree in Neuroscience, Pharmacology or Psychology is preferred. 

Submit a formal application here: https://humanresources.umn.edu/content/find-job. Search Job ID#: 326901. 

Please also email the application materials (cover letter, CV and names of 3 references) directly to Sade Spencer, Ph.D. (spencers@umn.edu).

Closing out Women's History Month

Hi everyone!

Thanks for stopping by to check out this week's updates. As you may know, this last month was Women's History Month, which shined a light on the accomplishments and progress of women across all disciplines. Seeing women's progress across time can evoke a humbling and inspiring feeling -- but we still have so much more to do. So get out there and continue making history!

Speaking of inspiration, have you registered for the annual Inclusion and Innovation Summit and Awards Ceremony on April 24th?  Presented by the Association for Women in Science, the goal of this summit is to discuss the importance of diversity and inclusion, as well as how to employ these ideas in the real world. Registration to the summit is free, but closing soon! Need evidence to exemplify the importance of diversity and inclusion in STEM? We've got you covered! Read on as to how promoting diversity and inclusion increases job satisfaction, improves productivity, and a whole lot more!

If you're following the news, you may have heard that NASA is cancelling their first ever all-women spacewalk. Why is that? Because the correct size space suit was not available for one the astronauts! Probably not the most convincing reason, but this certainly highlights the inequality that women face in STEM environments. Read on in this article about the ongoing struggle of women in STEM, and how NASA's decision feed into it.

For some inspiration on outreach, read on about this event tailored to getting girls interested in STEM

The NIH is considering banning reviewers who have been accused of sexual harassment. What do you think of this potential decision?

To close out this Women's History Month, here is some Advice For the Next Generation of Women in STEM.

Thanks for reading, and see you in April!

Post doc position available!

Our picks for March 22, 2019!

Representation matters!  

In an attempt to boost representation of successful women in STEM and thus encourage girls to not leave these careers, Lyda Hill Philanthropies announced it will create the IF/THEN initiative. This $25 million plan aims to contribute to a culture change among young girls to open their eyes to STEM careers.

IF/THEN welcome page, check them out!

Breaking records in math!  

For the first time in history a woman, the  US mathematician Karen Keskulla Uhlenbeck, has won the 2019 Abel Prize. The prize, awarded by the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters, and created in 2003, recognized her groundbreaking work on partial differential equations, at the heart of most physical laws.

 

 Karen Keskulla Uhlenbeck, giving a talk at the Institute for Advanced Study. Photo: Andrea Kane 

Apply to be a Virtual Visiting Scholar 

The ARC Network, a community aiming to advance STEM equity in academia, is looking for two Virtual Visiting Scholars to conduct research on existing or emerging themes from scholarly literature on gender equity in STEM workplaces. If you are interested learn more here, the closing date is June 1st, 2019.

About the importance of community 

This article, published this week in Refinery 29, explores the impact of community and networking on the success rate of female business founders. In addition to provide up-to-date statistics on how female founders perform on the market, the authors describes the conference Wide Awake: A day for Female Founders, that took place in early March and gathered a powerhouse lineup of women disrupting traditional industries. The day-long event aimed to provide thoughtful advice, valuable networking, and professional development for young female entrepreneurs.

Gender bias in the Japan and UK

Currently in Japan, Women represent only 16% of the research population. After summarizing the statistics, this article reflects on the reasons why women representation is so low by interviewing two leading Japanese female scientists.

Info graphic included in the article summarizing some of the gender gap statistics measured 

today in Japan. 

Another article focuses in gender bias in the UK, and reports the results of a survey showing that female scientists are disfavored when starting a laboratory by receiving less money and staff, two core resources for any new laboratory.

Info graphic included in the article showing the disparity between men and women salaries as principal investigators in UK labs.

Get inspired by these trailblazing women! 

To end Women's history month on a high note, learn about these 10 women in STEM that are making breakthroughs in their respective fields, including space, ecology and engineering. 

That is all for this week, don't forget to follow us on twitter for daily posts aimed to empower women! 

Becoming a PI in Academia, Authorship, and More!

Another study on Authorship and Publishing

Another study on gender differences on authorship and publishing came out in Ecology and Evolution this month. This one looked at manuscript outcomes following peer review based on the gender of the authors, finding that "papers with female first authors obtained, on average, slightly worse peer‐review scores and were more likely to be rejected after peer review."

Becoming a PI in Academia

Publishing is probably on your mind if you're goal is to run your own research lab. And for good reason: a new study that looked at recent hires at research institutions finds that "whether or not a scientist becomes a PI is largely predictable by their publication record." And furthermore, that men are more likely to become PIs than women even when other factors, like publication record, are the same. (As a side note: don't let their PI Predictor tell you whether or not you can be a PI -- I for one don't want the makeup of future PIs to be determined by an algorithm based on current biased trends!).

Another study published as a preprint in bioRxiv surveyed new PIs about their transition to running a lab. They found that men had more funding and higher salaries than women in similar positions. They also find that "too many new investigators express frustration and poor optimism for the future," possibly because they don't have the right support to transition to being a PI. On the plus side, their data also led them to develop a great list of recommendations for host institutions, funders, and those applying for PI positions to help fix these problems!

Finally, a study in JAMA showed that men get larger first-time NIH grants than women (women's grants are 24% smaller on average!). Interestingly, an article in Science disputes the relevance of this finding, arguing that for he grants that matter most (e.g., R01s), women and men get equal funding. 

Other Links of Interest

Check out this conference for Women in Statistics and Data Science!: https://ww2.amstat.org/meetings/wsds/2019/index.cfm

Women in science are facing misogynist new laws in Brazil: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00762-1

Have good sense of humor? That might hurt you if you're a woman looking for a promotion: https://psmag.com/social-justice/workplace-humor-beneficial-for-men-detrimental-for-women

Women entrepreneurs are changing the world! https://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2019/03/08/international-womens-day-2019-how-female-entrepreneurs-are-changing-the-world/#6906475a5f21

Women's History Month and more in this week's picks!

March is Women's History month!! As suggested in our twitter account, take advantage of the many opportunities to learn more about all the women in STEM who paved the way and the contemporary women fighting to make STEM fields move forward.

As an introductory reading, this article explains neurosexism, i.e., the use of brain studies to claim that men and women brains are wired differently and that gender roles are just the result of this biological fact. The author discusses what evidence exists for both sides of the debate.

Recently the NIH issued an official apology about it's failure to address sexual harassment in science. This article summarizes the statement delivered by NIH Director Francis Collins and mentions the work done by Dr. BethAnn McLaughlin, leader of the #MeTooSTEM movement, to advocate for victims of harassment within Academia. In this article, Orly Nadell Farber, a second-year student at Stanford University School of Medicine who worked in several NIH-funded institutions, responds to the official apology and discusses the sexual harassment culture present at NIH and more globally in STEM.

In this short Harvard Business Review podcast episode, the host Alison Beard interviews Girls Who Code founder Reshma Saujani. They discuss gender discrimination in STEM and strategies to encourage girls to remain in STEM careers despite this bias. 

Finally, this article explains a statistic that appears paradoxical at first glance: the negative correlation between women empowerment and representation of women in STEM. A recent Psychological Science study suggests this paradox could be explained women in countries with higher gender inequality turning to STEM professions to ensure financial freedom.

Don't forget to follow us on twitter (pwnWomenInSTEM, @in_pwn) to keep up with threats and articles about women in STEM!! 

History of Women in STEM, Science Moms, and More!

History of Women in STEM

Women contributed to building the field of computer programming. In fact, in the 1960s, women specifically were thought to have the kind of mind needed to be a good computer programmer. But now fewer than 20% of people graduating with computer science degrees are women. Check out this New York Times article to learn more about why the gender disparity in computer programming has worsened over the last several decades.

Some of these female programmers of the 1960s/1970s went on to make important contributions to genetics research--but were not acknowledged as authors of the published work. This article shows how women have always been contributing to science -- you might just have to look at the footnotes rather than the authors to find them!

Losing Moms in STEM

A new report (summarized here) indicates that 40% of full time women working in science leave their jobs after having a child. This is compared to only 23% of men. It's suspected that this could be due to the fact that STEM professionals, especially women, are not expected to have a personal life, making it harder for parents to make enough time for their children while maintaining their work responsibilities.

Opportunities

HBO is looking for women's stories! Read more and find out how to submit yours here.

Check out the American Association of Women in Science Annual Summit and Awards Dinner, to be held in Washington DC in April.

This week's picks!

If you're in the mood for some non-stop reading action, you're in luck! February 11th was Women in STEM day, so we've got an extra dose of articles for you to peruse. Additionally, are you on Twitter? What a coincidence, so are we! Follow us! @pwnWomenInSTEM

First, have you considered the gender bias that persists when it comes to conference speaker lineups?
This article in Science delves into this issue, and reminds us of 500 Women Scientists, a database listing women scientists by their respective fields (it's super cool and you should sign up!). This way, there is never an excuse that a woman scientist couldn't be found as a conference speaker.

For all the intellectual feats that we face being in STEM, you would think that those at the top in leadership positions would be knowledgeable and sensitive to sexual harassment, particularly in the midst of the #MeToo movement. However, more and more evidence is piling up that this is not the case. There is the misguided notion that sexual harassment only occurs in the bedroom and is an explicitly physical, sexual action. It's not! There is so much more that needs to be taken into account. Read on here about what we need to know, and what needs to be done. Sexual harassment is not biased to any particular discipline; we experience it in STEM, too. This is also a contributing factor to why women in STEM face huge disadvantages. Meet the neuroscientist who is combating sexual harassment and "harassholes" while having her own job at risk.

Another story, by the San Francisco Chronicle, brings up an issue we've discussed in previous updates: female scientists not being given the credit they're owed. Read more about what women scientists of the past have actually contributed, and how we can tackle this subject moving forward.

Here, we have an encouraging question: Is This the Year Of Women in Science? With more and more women enrolling in STEM majors, we have a lot of great things to look forward to. This dataset from the EU reflects the proportional increase of women in STEM highlighted in countries like Lithuania, Bulgaria, and Latvia.

Do you remember Jess Wade, the physicist who took to Wikipedia and wrote 500 biographies of female scientists? Here is an update written by her on why she felt compelled to author those hundreds of entries.

Our picks for Feb 9th, 2019

This week we would like to highlight a great podcast episode from the Harvard Business Review recommended to us by a member of the PWN community. In the episode, the host Sarah Green Carmichael discusses the benefits and techniques of how men can mentor women. Associate professor of sociology at the U.S. Naval War College David Smith and professor of psychology at the United States Naval Academy Brad Johnson, authors of "Athena rising: How and why men should mentor women", join the discussion.

In this article published by Inside Higher Ed, author Nick Roll dissects the results of a recent paper published by Georgetown University researchers on factors explaining the low number of women in STEM. They found that it is only the combination of bad grades and environment that drive women who entered a STEM major away from science, not these factors by themselves. 

Stay tuned for our next selection!

Our Picks for February 4th

Network Like a Woman

We all know that being part of PWN is fun and informative -- and a new study in PNAS suggests that it's also excellent for our career development. The authors assessed the post-graduate placement of students in both STEM and non-STEM graduate programs. They found that for women (but not men), students got better jobs when they had networks that included other women. The authors attribute this to women with strong women-containing networks having "simultaneous access to gender-related tacit information important for women’s success as well as diverse job-market data needed for successful job search and negotiations."

In a Washington Post article about this study, a researcher who was not involved in the study noted, “Women’s networks you haven't necessarily thought of as strategic are strategic.” So if you haven't realized already, your membership in PWN is strategic! Want to strengthen those connections? Come hang out with us on Slack (click here to join!).

Thanks to Kasia Bieszczad for sharing the Washington Post article! If you have articles you want to share, feel free to e-mail us or post them on Slack!

Other Articles of Interest 

"Diversity without inclusion is an empty gesture."

In an insightful article in Nature this week, David Asai argues that managers (i.e., PIs in academia) need training on how to be more inclusive of those from minoritized backgrounds. It's not enough to just hire people from diverse backgrounds, we must also insure that everyone feels included in the scientific community -- otherwise we'll be stuck with the same "leaky pipeline" we have now. The sad reality is that most of the people in charge are from a very narrow set of backgrounds and may never have thought about the ways in which they are not being inclusive. Thus, training in inclusion is essential to build a scientific community that looks like the global community.

Co-First Author Bias

A study published in eLife this week suggested bias in co-first authorship. Specifically, it suggests that in co-first author situations that include both an man and a woman, the man is more often listed first. As the first co-first author often gets more credit for the work, this raises concern about such bias impacting women's careers.

Job Posting: Postdoc at Massachusetts General Hospital

Post-doctoral position is available in the laboratory of Dr. Ksenia Kastanenka at Massachusetts General Hospital an affiliate of Harvard Medical School. The laboratory is part of a larger multi-disciplinary group, the scientific effort of which is geared toward understanding the etiology and progression of Alzheimer’s disease. The laboratory is focused on studying circuit disruptions during the disease progression and understanding mechanisms of action of therapeutics aimed at reversing the disease. To that end state-of-the-art technology, such as in vivo imaging with multiphoton microscopy, is used to monitor circuit dynamics. Additionally, optogenetics is used to modulate circuit activity. For more information, visit https://www.massgeneral.org/neurology/research/researchlab.aspx?id=1803

Desired qualifications:
We seek a self-motivated individual with a Ph.D. in Neuroscience or related biomedical discipline with a strong intellectual commitment to understanding mechanisms of disease using murine models and an enthusiasm for multidisciplinary research. Evidence of prior productivity is required evidenced by high-quality research publications. Good inter-personal and communication skills are a must.

To apply, please email your CV and a cover letter summarizing your experience, along with the contact information of three references to kkastanenka@mgh.harvard.edu addressed to Dr. Ksenia Kastanenka.

This week's picks

As we've seen in previous articles and in our own experiences, implicit bias can cloud even those with the best of intentions. That's the thing about implicit bias -- we're not aware we are constantly engaging in it. But in this article by Scientific American , you can see how implicit bias affects us in our every day life. Sometimes we can witness it in action in something relatively inconsequential like a TV show, but sometimes we can see it rear its ugly head when determining something as important as career opportunities.

Nature published and article describing the wage gap between males in females in various areas of studies. The general trend seen was that in fields where the gender balance was more equal, the pay gap was less drastic. However, in male-dominant fields, the wage gap became more of a chasm. Read on about the evolution of the wage gap!

If you're a bookworm, have we got a goldmine for you! WomenYouShouldKnow published the Ultimate Women in Science Reading List! One-hundred and fifty titles of biographies, memoirs, you name it. Happy reading!

You know that feeling when you have an idea, and no one listens to you, but when someone else speaks up and repeats your idea, suddenly it's brilliant? Ok, take that feeling and magnify it by 100 because this sort of thing has happened with women scientists and their career-defining, discipline-altering works. The Independent goes on to outline such cases like Rosalind Franklin who originally discovered the double helix structure, only to have her recognition and credit usurped by Watson and Crick. While not surprised by the number of women similar circumstances have happened, to, you can't help but still feel stunned by how pervasive the down-playing of women's contribution to  science is and has been. This is worth the read. You might be surprised to see how many well-known monumental scientific breakthroughs were actually discovered by women.

Lastly, we have a quick read from Nature, describing the results from a study identifying factors that promote postdoctoral success. Two major findings were discussed: 1) join a lab that is lacking the expertise you gleaned from graduate school. In doing this, you are bringing a new, unique perspective to the lab! Go to where the need is greater! And 2) seek prolific postdoctoral mentors who have an extensive track record of training students. They've had the practice, which can only benefit you. These two factors were major contributions in predicting future success. Use them wisely! I know I will in the coming months when I'm on the market!

Have a great day, and see you in February!

Our Picks for January 18th, 2019

Our Picks for January 18th, 2019

Take a look at the following articles selected by the PWN Blog team. The list is short, but interesting!

As we settle in the new year, this article looks back to the 5 most profound changes that the Women in STEM fields underwent in 2018. The author, JR Thorpe, highlights Nobel Prize Laureates, discoveries by women-led NASA teams and the #MeToo movement.

In this article published by the Huffington Post, senior reporter Emily Peck reviews the results of a recent report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The study focused on the influence of sexual harassment in academia on the career advancement of women in the scientific, technical and medical workforce. One of the main results reported is that the best predictor of sexual harassment is the organizational climate of the company, i.e. the culture cultivated by the organization. 

Finally, the American Association of University Women (AAUW) gathered recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau (2017 American Community Survey) in this short summary explaining the current state of gender pay gap. One of the main conclusions of the data analysis is that, although women are as effective as men in negotiating wages, they are paid less across the board, even with advanced degrees.

Wishing everyone a productive, goal-setting January!

Our first picks for the New Year!

Happy 2019! Hope everyone is doing well and starting off the new year on the right foot.

First up, we have a short piece from Forbes. The Financial Times newspaper in London recently created a bot that detected when a journalist was disproportionately quoting men in their writing. Apparently, 79% of people quoted in the Financial Times were men! With the implementation of this bot, the goal is to break the tendency to rely on old habits and instead have journalists branch out in their sources and create a more diverse, vibrant culture. With companies taking progressive actions like these, it evokes a sense of hope for gender-balance.

However, even with the most progressive companies, there is a sneaky clause called "forced arbitration" buried deep within employee and consumer contracts. Essentially, if there is any grievance or dispute within the company, the employee or consumer is required to waive their right to sue, participate in a class action lawsuit, or appeal. Basically, it's up to the company how they want to settle a dispute, and they don't have to document their resolve or make it public to anyone! You can see how this could be problematic in a variety of cases, and in particular, sexual harassment. Read more about how this unjust clause if negatively affecting the gender balance we strive to achieve.

An in depth post from Buzzfeed introduces us to 5 feminist academics spearheading the rights of transgender people in Britain. These women discuss why trans rights are feminist rights, why they feel the need to take action, and tackle the misconceptions we often hear surrounding the topics of transgender people. Is biology at odds with society? How do you address children who are questioning their gender identity? Who can make the decision in such cases? What does the future hold? Read on to understand the issues at hand and how these women are fighting to make the world a better place.

Next, a study found that when leaders take sexual harassment seriously, so do their employees. This makes sense, right? I know we're all upstanding citizens of the world, but say we started to stroll in late to work every other day and your boss never takes action to correct this behavior, what's the big deal? But if we know our employer will enforce promptness and take action if the offense gets to be too much, we're gonna make sure to be on time. On a much grander scale, with something as serious as sexual harassment, it's incredibly important to let your employees know that there is no room for such behavior and that serious consequences will be implemented. Read on here!

The Chronicle Review asked presidents, adjuncts, scientists, humanists, senior scholars, and junior professors the write about woman and power in academe. Read the plethora of different perspectives here. 

That's all for this week! Thanks for stopping by!