I am taking a break from dealing with other issues to post a Bluetorial I had been already working on. This deals with tools for examining inclusion based on gender in the scientific community.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Bluetorial: Analysis of author and reviewer gender at Science
When I started at Science, the editorial team was working on a project analyzing the inclusion of women as authors of Science submissions and published papers. We completed the analysis after I started and then extended it.
When I started as Editor-in-Chief in July 2016, I was undated about ongoing projects. The editorial team was interested in whether the review and editorial processes produced different outcomes for female versus male authors.
That summer, 2 (paid) interns working at Science were assigned to the task of identifying the gender of such authors for papers published in 2015 along with a randomly selected matched set of manuscripts that had been submitted but not published during the same period.
When they completed their work, the found that 117/471 (24.8%) of the first authors were female (limited to the authors for which gender could be inferred). This compares with 130/434 (30.0%) for the manuscripts that were not published.
Comments
When I started at Science, the editorial team was working on a project analyzing the inclusion of women as authors of Science submissions and published papers. We completed the analysis after I started and then extended it.
2/n
3/n
4/n
5/n
6/n
I tried not to make any policy recommendations in my thread, just to post the data and the methodology.
You can pull my ability to post facts out of my cold, dead hands.