Non-White scientists appear on fewer editorial boards, spend more time under review, and receive fewer citations.

Disparities continue to pose major challenges in various aspects of science. One such aspect is editorial board composition, which has been shown to exhibit racial and geographical disparities. However, the literature on this subject lacks longitudinal studies quantifying the degree to which the racial composition of editors reflects that of scientists. Other aspects that may exhibit racial disparities include the time spent between the submission and acceptance of a manuscript and the number of citations a paper receives relative to textually similar papers, but these have not been studied to date. To fill this gap, we compile a dataset of 1,000,000 papers published between 2001 and 2020 by six publishers, while identifying the handling editor of each paper. Using this dataset, we show that most countries in Asia, Africa, and South America (where the majority of the population is ethnically non-White) have fewer editors than would be expected based on their share of authorship. Focusing on US-based scientists reveals Black as the most underrepresented race. In terms of acceptance delay, we find, again, that papers from Asia, Africa, and South America spend more time compared to other papers published in the same journal and the same year. Regression analysis of US-based papers reveals that Black authors suffer from the greatest delay. Finally, by analyzing citation rates of US-based papers, we find that Black and Hispanic scientists receive significantly fewer citations compared to White ones doing similar research. Taken together, these findings highlight significant challenges facing non-White scientists.

Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines.

There is extensive, yet fragmented, evidence of gender differences in academia suggesting that women are underrepresented in most scientific disciplines and publish fewer articles throughout a career, and their work acquires fewer citations. Here, we offer a comprehensive picture of longitudinal gender differences in performance through a bibliometric analysis of academic publishing careers by reconstructing the complete publication history of over 1.5 million gender-identified authors whose publishing career ended between 1955 and 2010, covering 83 countries and 13 disciplines. We find that, paradoxically, the increase of participation of women in science over the past 60 years was accompanied by an increase of gender differences in both productivity and impact. Most surprisingly, though, we uncover two gender invariants, finding that men and women publish at a comparable annual rate and have equivalent career-wise impact for the same size body of work. Finally, we demonstrate that differences in publishing career lengths and dropout rates explain a large portion of the reported career-wise differences in productivity and impact, although productivity differences still remain. This comprehensive picture of gender inequality in academia can help rephrase the conversation around the sustainability of women's careers in academia, with important consequences for institutions and policy makers.

Scientific rewards for biomedical specialization are large and persistent.

BACKGROUND: While specialization plays an essential role in how scientific research is pursued, we understand little about its effects on a researcher's impact and career. In particular, the extent to which one specializes within their chosen fields likely has complex relationships with productivity, career stage, and eventual impact. Here, we develop a novel and fine-grained approach for measuring a researcher's level of specialization at each point in their career and apply it to the publication data of almost 30,000 established biomedical researchers to measure the effect that specialization has on the impact of a researcher's publications. RESULTS: Using a within-researcher, panel-based econometric framework, we arrive at several important results. First, there are significant scientific rewards for specialization-25% more citations per standard deviation increase in specialization. Second, these benefits are much higher early in a researcher's career-as large as 75% per standard deviation increase in specialization. Third, rewards are higher for researchers who publish few papers relative to their peers. Finally, we find that, all else equal, researchers who make large changes in their research direction see generally increased impact. CONCLUSIONS: The extent to which one specializes, particularly at the early stages of a biomedical research career, appears to play a significant role in determining the citation-based impact of their publications. When this measure of impact is, implicitly or explicitly, an input into decision-making processes within the scientific system (for example, for job opportunities, promotions, or invited talks), these findings lead to some important implications for the system-level organization of scientific research and the incentives that exist therein. We propose several mechanisms within modern scientific systems that likely lead to the scientific rewards we observe and discuss them within the broader context of reward structures in biomedicine and science more generally.

The chaperone effect in scientific publishing.

Experience plays a critical role in crafting high-impact scientific work. This is particularly evident in top multidisciplinary journals, where a scientist is unlikely to appear as senior author if he or she has not previously published within the same journal. Here, we develop a quantitative understanding of author order by quantifying this "chaperone effect," capturing how scientists transition into senior status within a particular publication venue. We illustrate that the chaperone effect has a different magnitude for journals in different branches of science, being more pronounced in medical and biological sciences and weaker in natural sciences. Finally, we show that in the case of high-impact venues, the chaperone effect has significant implications, specifically resulting in a higher average impact relative to papers authored by new principal investigators (PIs). Our findings shed light on the role played by experience in publishing within specific scientific journals, on the paths toward acquiring the necessary experience and expertise, and on the skills required to publish in prestigious venues.

Changing demographics of scientific careers: The rise of the temporary workforce.

Contemporary science has been characterized by an exponential growth in publications and a rise of team science. At the same time, there has been an increase in the number of awarded PhD degrees, which has not been accompanied by a similar expansion in the number of academic positions. In such a competitive environment, an important measure of academic success is the ability to maintain a long active career in science. In this paper, we study workforce trends in three scientific disciplines over half a century. We find dramatic shortening of careers of scientists across all three disciplines. The time over which half of the cohort has left the field has shortened from 35 y in the 1960s to only 5 y in the 2010s. In addition, we find a rapid rise (from 25 to 60% since the 1960s) of a group of scientists who spend their entire career only as supporting authors without having led a publication. Altogether, the fraction of entering researchers who achieve full careers has diminished, while the class of temporary scientists has escalated. We provide an interpretation of our empirical results in terms of a survival model from which we infer potential factors of success in scientific career survivability. Cohort attrition can be successfully modeled by a relatively simple hazard probability function. Although we find statistically significant trends between survivability and an author's early productivity, neither productivity nor the citation impact of early work or the level of initial collaboration can serve as a reliable predictor of ultimate survivability.

Remembering Our Forebears: Albert Jan Kluyver and the Unity of Life.

The Dutch microbiologist/biochemist Albert Jan Kluyver (1888-1956) was an early proponent of the idea of biochemical unity, and how that concept might be demonstrated through the careful study of microbial life. The fundamental relatedness of living systems is an obvious correlate of the theory of evolution, and modern attempts to construct phylogenetic schemes support this relatedness through comparison of genomes. The approach of Kluyver and his scientific descendants predated the tools of modern molecular biology by decades. Kluyver himself is poorly recognized today, yet his influence at the time was profound. Through lens of today however, it has been argued that the focus by Kluyver and others to create taxonomic and phylogenetic schemes using morphology and biochemistry distorted and hindered progress of the discipline of microbiology, because of a perception that the older approaches focused too much on a reductionist worldview. This essay argues that in contrast the careful characterization of fundamental microbial metabolism and physiology by Kluyver made many of the advances of the latter part of the twentieth century possible, by offering a framework which in many respects anticipated our current view of phylogeny, and by directly and indirectly training a generation of scientists who became leaders in the explosive growth of biotechnology.

Gender-related issues in a Taiwanese university medical science laboratory setting: a qualitative analysis.

Introduction: This paper provides a glimpse into gender issues in a university-based medical science laboratory setting in northern Taiwan. In this study, gender issues with respect to perceptions regarding gender, the degree of gender neutrality in the work environment, and the influence of gender on researchers' academic careers were analyzed. Methods: From July to August 2021, semistructured interviews to understand the perspectives of five faculty members at Chang Gung University School of Medicine regarding gender issues were conducted. The data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically. Subsequently, coding was performed using ATLAS.ti Web (Version 4.0.10). Results and discussion: It was found that gender is not perceived to correlate with performance in the medical sciences. Although the medical science laboratories in the study institution are mostly gender-neutral, instances of discrimination might have been concealed elsewhere because of underreporting. Nevertheless, medical science research culture in Chang Gung University appears to promote respect and equality owing to increased general awareness regarding such issues as well as robust policies that protect women's rights and promote gender equality. Marriage, motherhood, and family obligations remain key challenges to the academic career of female scientists in the institution. To achieve more equitable representation of male and female scientists as well as to prevent female scientists from leaving medical science laboratories in Taiwan, institutional and national policies that provide tailored support for female scientists intending to start families must continue to be implemented.

Scientific elite revisited: patterns of productivity, collaboration, authorship and impact.

Throughout history, a relatively small number of individuals have made a profound and lasting impact on science and society. Despite long-standing, multi-disciplinary interests in understanding careers of elite scientists, there have been limited attempts for a quantitative, career-level analysis. Here, we leverage a comprehensive dataset we assembled, allowing us to trace the entire career histories of nearly all Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine over the past century. We find that, although Nobel laureates were energetic producers from the outset, producing works that garner unusually high impact, their careers before winning the prize follow relatively similar patterns to those of ordinary scientists, being characterized by hot streaks and increasing reliance on collaborations. We also uncovered notable variations along their careers, often associated with the Nobel Prize, including shifting coauthorship structure in the prize-winning work, and a significant but temporary dip in the impact of work they produce after winning the Nobel Prize. Together, these results document quantitative patterns governing the careers of scientific elites, offering an empirical basis for a deeper understanding of the hallmarks of exceptional careers in science.

Accelerated Researchers: Psychosocial Risks in Gendered Institutions in Academia.

In recent decades, scientific institutions have undergone significant changes due to new managerialism and the application of excellence in research. This research model has given rise to tensions related to increasing pressures and working demands in a competitive international environment that accelerate the pace of academic life. In addition, precarious working conditions and job insecurity have affected academics' lives and careers. Academic literature has already addressed these organizational changes and their impact on academics, however, few studies have focused on psychosocial risks related to time constraints, meritocratic pressures and career insecurity from a gender perspective. This analysis is relevant given the gendered distribution of responsibilities and the evidence of gender biases in academia that hinder the advancement of gender equality in scientific institutions, as the persistent lack of women at the top of research careers show. In this paper, we explore the psychosocial effects of the new organizational model of science characterized by accelerated time regimes and precarious working conditions from a gender perspective. We draw attention to gender-based discriminatory practices that may yield an accumulative effect on the well-being of women academics. We analyze 36 interviews from women and men researchers from five areas of knowledge in Spanish universities and research centers, following a 'gendered institutions' approach. The results highlight psychosocial risks for both men and women academics as a result of accelerated work organizations, intensified by uncertainty and hyper-competition due to lack of positions. The hegemonic male work model characterized by total availability confirms academia as a gendered institution, especially damaging women's well-being and careers, as well as those of men committed to care responsibilities - challenging motherhood explanations - which may discourage them from the pursuit of gender equality. Our findings highlight discriminatory practices toward women academics which create psychological harm and feelings of being unwelcome, putting their career progression at risk. Lastly, we suggest a different model of work organization following the implementation of a culture based on an 'ethics of care' feminist approach.

Generations of interdisciplinarity in bioinformatics.

Bioinformatics, a specialism propelled into relevance by the Human Genome Project and the subsequent -omic turn in the life science, is an interdisciplinary field of research. Qualitative work on the disciplinary identities of bioinformaticians has revealed the tensions involved in work in this "borderland." As part of our ongoing work on the emergence of bioinformatics, between 2010 and 2011, we conducted a survey of United Kingdom-based academic bioinformaticians. Building on insights drawn from our fieldwork over the past decade, we present results from this survey relevant to a discussion of disciplinary generation and stabilization. Not only is there evidence of an attitudinal divide between the different disciplinary cultures that make up bioinformatics, but there are distinctions between the forerunners, founders and the followers; as inter/disciplines mature, they face challenges that are both inter-disciplinary and inter-generational in nature.

Um brasileiro no Reich de Guilherme II: Henrique da Rocha Lima, as relações Brasil-Alemanha e o Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 1901-1909 / A Brazilian in the Reich of Wilhelm II: Henrique da Rocha Lima, Brazil-Germany relations and the Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 1901-1909

Apresenta a trajetória do médico brasileiro Henrique da Rocha Lima, um dos primeiros a compor o grupo de jovens pesquisadores do Instituto Soroterápico de Manguinhos (Instituto Oswaldo Cruz). Examina sua primeira viagem à Alemanha, onde se especializou em microbiologia e anatomia patológica, configurando sua identidade profissional. As tensões e dilemas enfrentados por Rocha Lima permitem melhor compreender o que significava a dedicação à carreira científica no Brasil do início do século XX. Ademais, lançam luz sobre a importância das relações com o mundo germânico para a medicina experimental que se instituía sob a liderança de Oswaldo Cruz.

This article follows the career of the Brazilian physician Henrique da Rocha Lima, one of the first to join the group of young researchers working at the Instituto Soroterápico de Manguinhos (Instituto Oswaldo Cruz). It describes his first voyage to Germany where he specialized in microbiology and pathological anatomy, training that shaped his subsequent professional identity. The tensions and dilemmas experienced by Rocha Lima provide an insight into what it meant to dedicate oneself to a scientific career in Brazil at the start of the twentieth century. They also reveal the importance of the relations with the German-speaking world for the experimental medicine that became established under the leadership of Oswaldo Cruz.

A trajetória de Henrique da Rocha Lima e as relações teuto-brasileiras (1901-1956) / The career of Henrique da Rocha Lima and German-Brazilian relations (1901-1956)

A trajetória de Henrique da Rocha Lima vincula-se estreitamente às relações científicas e culturais entre Brasil e Alemanha. Seus trabalhos científicos foram produzidos em instituições de pesquisa biomédica dos dois países, mas foi na Alemanha que ele conquistou projeção internacional, graças a suas pesquisas nos campos da microbiologia, patologia e medicina tropical. Lastreado pelo prestígio e boa inserção nas comunidades científicas brasileira e alemã, contribuiu para o estreitamento do intercâmbio intelectual entre os dois países, mobilizando diversos personagens e instituições como pontos de apoio. Apresentam-se percalços e desafios impostos pelo estudo desse personagem complexo, cuja trajetória lança luz, a um só tempo, sobre os meandros das relações científicas internacionais e sobre processos sócio-históricos marcantes na institucionalização das ciências no Brasil.

The career of Henrique da Rocha Lima is closely linked to cultural and scientific relations between Brazil and Germany. He pursued his scientific work at biomedical research institutions in both countries, but it was in Germany that he attained international standing, thanks to his research in the fields of microbiology, pathology and tropical medicine. His prestige and active participation in both Brazil's and Germany's scientific communities meant he was able to further academic interchange between both nations, mobilizing many people and institutions to contribute to this process. I present the obstacles and challenges faced in studying this complex character, whose career sheds light on the machinations of international scientific relations and some socio-historical processes that marked the institutionalization of science in Brazil.