Search bioRxivSearch

bioRxiv · 10.1101/785717

Policy should change to improve invited speaker diversity and reflect trainee diversity

Abstract

The biomedical sciences have a problem retaining white women and underrepresented minorities in academia. Despite increases in the representation of these groups in faculty candidate pools, they are still underrepresented at the faculty level, particularly at the Full Professor level. The lack of diverse individuals at the Full Professor level contributes to the attrition of women and under-represented minorities, as it confirms unconscious biases. The presence of unconscious biases contribute to feelings of not belonging by trainees and are amplified by visual representation of who is presented as the \"top scientist in their field\". Top scientists are not only defined by the attainment of Full Professorships, but also through invited seminar series. Invitations for faculty to present their research at other university departments is highly valued offer that provides an opportunity for collaborations and networking. However, if invited speakers do not represent the demographics of current trainees, these visual representations of successful scientists may contribute to decreased attitudes of self-identification as a scientist, ultimately resulting in trainees leaving the field or the academy. In this study, we compare invited-speaker demographics to the current trainee demographics in one microbiology and immunology department and find that trainees are not proportionally represented by speakers invited to the department. Our investigation prompted changes in policy for how invited speakers are selected in the future to invite a more diverse group of scientists. To facilitate this process, we developed a set of tips and a web-based resource that allows scientists, committees, and moderators to identify members of under-served groups. These resources can be easily adapted by other fields or sub-fields to promote inclusion and diversity at seminar series, conferences, and colloquia.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hagan, A. K., Pollet, R. M., Libertucci, J.. 2019-10-04. Policy should change to improve invited speaker diversity and reflect trainee diversity. https://doi.org/10.1101/785717

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education

Plagiarism in Brazil: A perspective of 25,000 PhD holders across the sciences

When it comes to ownership of ideas in science, Robert K. Merton (1957) observed in Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science that "what is true of physics, chemistry, astronomy, medicine and mathematics is true also of all the other scientific disciplines, not excluding the social and psychological sciences". However, consensus over related issues, such as what constitutes plagiarism in these fields cannot be taken for granted. We conducted a comprehensive study on plagiarism views among PhD holders registered in the database of the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). We collected 25,157 valid responses encompassing views and attitudes toward plagiarism from a probability sample of PhD holders across the fields, including biologists, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers as well as linguists, philosophers and anthropologists. The results suggest that core principles about plagiarism are shared among this multidisciplinary community and that they corroborate Mertons observations. Before this study, we could only speculate that this is the case. With these data from a probability sample of Brazilian academia (PhD holders), this study offers insight into the way plagiarism is perceived across the sciences, including the literature and arts, and sheds light on the problem in the context of international collaborative research networks. The data focus on a young research system in Latin America, but, given the cultural similarities that bind most Latin-American nations, these results may be relevant to other PhD populations in the region and should provide a comparison with studies from other emerging, non-Anglophone regions.

scientific communication and education

Turn of Events: Academic events as a platform for preregistration

Prereg posters are conference posters that present planned scientific projects. We provide preliminary evidence for their value in receiving constructive feedback, promoting open science, and supporting early career researchers.View Full Text

scientific communication and education