Flawed Data and Unjustified Conclusions Cannot Elevate the Status of Women in Science
Year: 2020
Type: preprint
Abstract: Scientists can and should critically examine the dynamics of, and biases within, their own fields. However, AlShebli and colleagues’ (2020) publication neither advances scientific knowledge nor makes empirically justified recommendations in their recent analysis of the citation rates of 3 million unique senior-junior scientist co-author pairs. The authors assess how ostensible markers of career success and the assumed gender of senior co-authors predict junior co-authors’ subsequent citation rates and find that women who publish with women are less likely to be cited. On the basis of these findings, they suggest that both senior and junior women should avoid working with, or being mentored by, other women. Based on correlational and unidimensional data, AlShebli et al. further offer policy recommendations for increasing diversity in science. In this brief commentary, we first explain methodological problems limiting the validity of the findings, then highlight significant conceptual concerns that undermine the conclusions drawn, and conclude by noting the lack of novelty in what the data do (if accurate) suggest about women’s careers in sciences.
Language: English
Subfield: Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
Field: Decision Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Gender equality
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W3160254499