Underrepresentation of Asian awardees of United States biomedical research prizes.

The lack of racial diversity among the winners of United States biomedical research prizes reflects a chronic problem of the underappreciation of certain groups of biomedical scientists. Asians continue to be severely underrepresented as awardees of United States biomedical research prizes, a trend that shows no obvious recent improvement.

Leading and Inspiring by Example.

Joan Steitz radiates a passion for science. Whether she's teaching an undergraduate course, mentoring a grad student or post-doc, or speaking at a scientific conference, her enthusiasm and curiosity for all things RNA is infectious. Joan, the recipient of the 2018 Lasker-Koshland Special Achievement Award in Medical Science, spoke with Cell editor (and her former post-doc) Lara Szewczak about how she came to be an advocate for women in science and shared advice for young scientists entering the research community today. Annotated excerpts from this conversation are presented below, and the full conversation is available with the article online.

Women are credited less in science than men.

There is a well-documented gap between the observed number of works produced by women and by men in science, with clear consequences for the retention and promotion of women1. The gap might be a result of productivity differences2-5, or it might be owing to women's contributions not being acknowledged6,7. Here we find that at least part of this gap is the result of unacknowledged contributions: women in research teams are significantly less likely than men to be credited with authorship. The findings are consistent across three very different sources of data. Analysis of the first source-large-scale administrative data on research teams, team scientific output and attribution of credit-show that women are significantly less likely to be named on a given article or patent produced by their team relative to their male peers. The gender gap in attribution is present across most scientific fields and almost all career stages. The second source-an extensive survey of authors-similarly shows that women's scientific contributions are systematically less likely to be recognized. The third source-qualitative responses-suggests that the reason that women are less likely to be credited is because their work is often not known, is not appreciated or is ignored. At least some of the observed gender gap in scientific output may be owing not to differences in scientific contribution, but rather to differences in attribution.

Quantifying hierarchy and dynamics in US faculty hiring and retention.

Faculty hiring and retention determine the composition of the US academic workforce and directly shape educational outcomes1, careers2, the development and spread of ideas3 and research priorities4,5. However, hiring and retention are dynamic, reflecting societal and academic priorities, generational turnover and efforts to diversify the professoriate along gender6-8, racial9 and socioeconomic10 lines. A comprehensive study of the structure and dynamics of the US professoriate would elucidate the effects of these efforts and the processes that shape scholarship more broadly. Here we analyse the academic employment and doctoral education of tenure-track faculty at all PhD-granting US universities over the decade 2011-2020, quantifying stark inequalities in faculty production, prestige, retention and gender. Our analyses show universal inequalities in which a small minority of universities supply a large majority of faculty across fields, exacerbated by patterns of attrition and reflecting steep hierarchies of prestige. We identify markedly higher attrition rates among faculty trained outside the United States or employed by their doctoral university. Our results indicate that gains in women's representation over this decade result from demographic turnover and earlier changes made to hiring, and are unlikely to lead to long-term gender parity in most fields. These analyses quantify the dynamics of US faculty hiring and retention, and will support efforts to improve the organization, composition and scholarship of the US academic workforce.

Voices on Diversity: Overcoming Barriers to Pursuing a Career in Science.

As part of our commitment to amplifying the voices of underrepresented scientists, we are publishing the insights and experiences of a panel of underrepresented scientists in a series of questions and answers. Here, they tell us about barriers they faced in pursuing a scientific career. These are the personal opinions of the authors and may not reflect the views of their institutions.

Women and Minorities Encouraged to Apply (Not Stay).

The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has deepened gender and racial diversity problems in academia. Mentorship shows women and other under-represented groups where the ladders to success are, and helps them avoid the chutes, a revised leaky pipeline metaphor. Here, we identify tangible strategies that will improve gender equity, including increasing active mentorship by male academics.