Diversity in Scientific Journals: An Exploration of Nature’s Publications Between 2017-2023

• In Event: Comparative Studies in Education (II)

Proposal

Women and Black, Indigenous, People of Colour (BIPOC) are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) worldwide due to a leaky pipeline which starts in primary school and extends to employment. The STEM leaky pipeline is much more than a metaphor for the underrepresentation of women and BIPOC, it represents a system of structural inequality which upholds the marginalization of gender and racial minorities. In the United States of America, over 70% of STEM professionals are men and in regard to race, another disparity arises (EEOC, n.d.). White men constitute 52% of STEM professionals, whereas Black men represent only 6% (EEOC, n.d.). Similarly, White women constitute 19.5% whereas Black women only 4.3% of the STEM workforce (EEOC, n.d.). In June 2020, in the midst of the Black Lives Matter movement, Black scientists organized the #ShutDownSTEM protest to rally against racial discrimination in academia worldwide. Various organizations supported #ShutDownSTEM by reviewing their equity, diversity, and inclusivity (EDI) policies and educating themselves on the racism in academia (MIT, 2020; Moloney, n.d.).
Nature, a reputable science journal, expressed support for this protest by delaying the publication of their weekly virtual issue, by “[working] on and [publishing] content about supporting Black people in academia and STEM, [and meeting] and begin planning how [they] can help eradicate racism” (Nature, 2020, para. 4) in their publication process. This paper seeks to explore if Nature’s initiatives have improved publication rates for marginalized people three years after the #ShutDownSTEM protest. This inspired the following questions: Has the #ShutDownSTEM protest increased the publication rates of women and BIPOC in the Nature journals? And, are women and BIPOC publication rates in the various Nature journals the same across different STEM fields?
To answer these questions, intersectionality and decolonial theories will be used to explore the politics of protest and resistance in the academic publishing process. Intersectionality provides insight into the different realities of people with intersecting identity traits, such as gender, race, and nationality, while also considering the power dynamics and the operation of privilege, and oppression, in social reproduction (Tefera et al., 2018). Decolonial theory will be used simultaneously to highlight the colonial structural barriers which continue to exist in academia. All articles published between 2017 and 2023, in Nature Physics, Nature Medicine, Nature Ecology and Evolution, and Nature Chemistry, will be reviewed where the authors’ demographics will be analyzed using descriptive statistics. Multiple regression analysis will also be used to explore the impact of gender, race, and STEM field in Nature’s publications. Four journals, Nature Physics, Nature Ecology and Evolution, Nature Medicine, and Nature Chemistry were chosen to reflect STEM fields which are often perceived to be more, or less, gendered - where physics is considered more masculine and biological fields more feminine (Makarova et al., 2019). Nature’s #ShutDownSTEM efforts and EDI policy reforms will then be cross-referenced with the publishing rates of different researcher demographics to understand if there has been an increase in the number of publications of women and BIPOC after the protest.
Finally, a common cause for the STEM gender and racial disparities is argued to be the lack of representation of women and BIPOC in these fields (Breda et al., 2020; Makarova et al., 2019). Currently, over half of the American STEM workforce consists of White men, which may deter BIPOC and women from pursuing these fields. Marginalized students benefit from having representation in academia as it may increase their sense of belonging in fields which have historically been dominated by White men. In turn, an increased sense of belonging for racial and gender minorities may ultimately narrow the STEM gaps. Thus, this paper sheds light on if STEM academic journals are addressing racial inequality and increasing representation through the articles they publish while also considering the role of protest in achieving meaningful change in the academic publishing process. The findings from this paper might also demonstrate that although Nature journals are making positive efforts in closing the gender and racial gaps, STEM disparities continue to persist due to racism and patriarchy at the micro and mezzo levels which continue to be transmitted to students through stereotypes, discrimination, implicit bias, and gender roles.

Author

• Gabrielle Thibeault-Orsi, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE), University of Toronto