Women are underrepresented and receive differential outcomes at ASM journals
Read the article and come up with 5 questions that you have left unanswered.
Bear in mind, questions are being graded on creativity, complexity, and understanding. Questions must not be simple questions or questions that cannot be found on the internet.
****Discussion questions must be relevant to the article itself. Questions relevant to the broad topic discussed in the article but not to the article itself will not receive any credit!
Women Underrepresentation and Differential Outcomes at ASM Journals
- While on the subject of Women underrepresentation in ASM despite their Ph.D. graduation rate being at 50%, why is it that the senior women at the organization are not doing much to boost the numbers (Hagan, et al., 2020, para 1)?
- Could it be bias on gender that is causing the negative reviews in Microbiology research manuscripts by women (Hagan, et al., 2020, para 9)?
- What could elevate the women representation more in authorship on microbial research in the different stages of authorship in reference to FIG S3 TIG File 0.2mb (Hagan, et al., 2020, para 11)?
- Why has the ASM not considered aspirational model of filling leadership positions in STEM in regard to the 50% women Ph.D. graduation rate (Hagan, et al., 2020, para 17)?
- What steps should be taken to properly fund women researchers in Mycology, and, what other methodologies can be applied other than the use of an algorithm to infer gender from first names to bar gender bias (Hagan, et al., 2020, para 31)?
Hagan, A.K., Topçuoğlu, B.D., Gregory, M.E., Barton, H.A., Schloss, P.D. (2020). Women are underrepresented and receive differential outcomes at ASM Journals: a six-year retrospective analysis. American Society for Microbiology 1(1). Retrieved from https://mbio.asm.org/content/11/6/e01680-20