This gender gap may help explain well-documented inequalities in the apparent contributions of male and female scientists – such as that of Rosalind Franklin, whose central contribution to the discovery of DNA structure was not initially recognized because it did not refer to its core Article Nature by James Watson and Francis Crick. “We have known for a long time that women publish and patent at a slower rate than men. “But because previous data never showed who was involved in the research, no one knew why,” said Julia Lane, a professor at New York University in the United States who led the new research. Lane and her colleagues analyzed administrative data for research programs conducted in 52 U.S. colleges and universities between 2013 and 2016. They matched information on 128,859 scientists with 39,426 journal articles and 7,675 patents, examining which individuals and which individual projects do not. The study, also published in Nature, suggests that Rosalind Franklin was not alone in not receiving due praise for her work. He found that, on average, in all job titles and fields, men were about twice as likely to be named in a scientific article or patent by their research team as women. This gap was seen in areas dominated by women, such as health, as well as in areas dominated by men, such as engineering, and was particularly evident in the early stages of women’s careers. For example, only 15 out of 100 postgraduate women were ever named as authors in a publication, compared to 21 in 100 male peers. “There is a clear gap between the rate at which women and men are named as co-authors in publications,” Lane said. “The gap is strong, persistent and independent of the research field. “I’m afraid it will prevent young women from pursuing science as a career.” Subscribe to the First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every morning at 7 p.m. BST The team also looked at more than 2,400 published scientists, asking if they had ever been excluded from a project to which they had contributed and why they believed this had happened. Of the women, 43% said they had been excluded from a post, compared with 38% of men. The most common explanation was that others had underestimated their contribution, however, women were twice as likely to cite discrimination or prejudice as an explanation, while men were more likely to say that their contributions did not justify writing. Dr Tina Joshi, a lecturer in molecular microbiology at the University of Plymouth, said: “This is a welcome study that highlights the gender gap that many women continue to face in academia. “We can continue to address this inequality as an academic community by encouraging dialogue on equality, diversity and inclusion and working together to give all researchers credit for their contribution.”
