In this section of Editors’ Update, we ask editors their opinion on a topic pertinent to the current issue, which is ‘Women in Science’. We asked a few prominent editors:

1) What are your experiences of positive or negative gender discrimination?
2) What does the future hold for women scientists in general, and for female authors in particular? How do you see this issue developing over time?

Dr Sue Barlow, independent consultant in toxicology working in the UK and Associate Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology (since 2002).

1) As a scientist I have had few negative experiences that I am aware of. As a young scientist in the 1970s, I was sometimes asked inappropriate questions in interviews about my home circumstances – partner’s work, children, etc – and it is good to see that such questions are now off-limits.

On the other hand, having worked for many years in a medical school and in the UK Department of Health, I have seen and experienced a different kind of discrimination – favoring medically qualified staff over equivalent or better-qualified scientists.

On the positive side, as Chief Scientist in the UK Department of Health, I was part of a team with oversight for career issues and opportunities. Part-time working and job-sharing was encouraged and welcomed, enabling women to continue at work while raising young children. Indeed, in the 1980s and early 1990s there were somewhat more women than men scientists in the Department, with many in senior positions.

Since 1999, The European Commission has been influential in ensuring gender equality by launching an action program for women in science. And, for its collaborative research programs, it is making it essential for applicants to address gender issues, both with respect to employment and mentoring of scientists within projects, and the content of the research itself.

I have been a member of a number of advisory committees and discussion groups at both national and international level and there have been noticeable occasions when I have been the only woman present. Women scientists in academia and in commerce will no doubt have had similar experiences. The reasons for this are complex and do not necessarily involve discrimination. However, it does illustrate there is still a significant gender issue out there.

2) I think the future for women scientists looks good. Gender action programs are still necessary but have undoubtedly made a positive impact in the world of science during the last three decades. We have at least moved from a situation where employers were unaware they were discriminating to one where the legal and social climate has reduced overt gender prejudice and provides remedies for those who feel they have been unjustly treated. The greatest social force for further improvement in the promotion of women as research scientists perhaps lies in the realization by scientists of both sexes that, for many, the work-life balance is currently in an unhealthy state and requires some radical change, both by employers and employees.

Professor Lynette Ferguson, Professor of Nutrition at the Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and Editor of Mutation Research, Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms.

1) When I first started as a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Auckland Medical School (1979), there were around 30 men at professor or associate professor level and two women associate professors. While this ratio has improved somewhat, equal numbers of women and men are appointed at lower levels but no more than a quarter of those in the highest echelon are women.

While I thought this was bias, I should note that I have served on the promotions committee and observed that women tend to wait far longer than men to put in their promotion applications. Men seem to be more confident; women are afraid they will get knocked back. I see it also in my journal experience. It is my impression that women more often wait to cross the t’s and dot the i’s.

One very positive thing that has happened at this university has been the Senior Women Leadership Programme, which I have been involved in through speaking and mentoring younger women. I do my utmost to encourage them to push themselves forward more confidently.

For a time there were some strong incentives to take on women preferentially in university jobs, but this led to a downgrading of women and almost made the situation worse. I remember when I was appointed at Associate Professor level one male colleague remarked, “Well, they must have needed to increase their quota of female associate professors that day!”

The Royal Society in New Zealand appoints around 20 new fellows each year. In the past two years, only one woman has been given this public honor.

In general, as a woman working in a male-dominated system, I have not found it easy to emerge as a senior academic and researcher. I think what has happened, however, is that such experiences have made me more focused in my ambitions, and possibly more effective in my work habits.

2) I feel the situation has improved significantly in the time I have been in science. Benchmarking tools such as Scopus provide a completely unbiased assessment of whose work is being cited – and do not distinguish males from females. They also enhance visibility, which is essential for good scientists to emerge.

However, while women bear children and are their primary caregivers, it is not always easy for them to work such long hours or travel when and where they please. Thus, biology does not make it easy.

It is reassuring to see today’s female role models in situations where they would not have been 10–20 years ago. For example, I am program leader of Nutrigenomics New Zealand, one of the major funded research groups in the country. This is largely based on an evaluation of numbers of publications, their nature and their impact.

My advice to younger women would be: keep publishing; don’t be caught up in self-doubt.

Professor Caroline Finch, Research Professor in Human Movement Science and National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Principal Research Fellow, School of Human Movement and Sport Sciences, University of Ballarat, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia. Finch is also Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport.

1) I was fortunate to have a father who was a leading university academic and strongly encouraged my entering science as a career. The message I heard clearly as a child was that women could achieve success just as well as men. I majored in statistics in both my undergraduate and postgraduate studies, in heavily male-dominated mathematics departments, and did not feel that there was any particular discrimination against women. It was not until I started to work in more medically oriented research groups that I started to perceive some preferential opportunities for my male colleagues, particularly those with medical training. However, as my career has progressed further and my own professional reputation been established, I have not strongly felt the impact of any gender discrimination. Perhaps the only negative factor I have experienced has been a lack of women role models and mentors to help guide my career.

2) I am always surprised when I hear that female authors in some disciplines may be disadvantaged. These days I work in the broad field of epidemiology, which is a popular career choice for women interested in undertaking medical research, and I often read papers by female authors. Neither my female colleagues nor I have, to my knowledge, experienced publication discrimination. As Editor-in Chief of JSAMS, I can truthfully say that the gender of authors has never been a factor in the consideration of any paper submitted for publication. The advice I would give young female authors is the same that I would give young male authors: partner with a more experienced scientist or seek mentoring advice to help you develop skills in writing for a formal scientific audience and in responding to reviewers’ comments. Most senior researchers have much knowledge to impart and, in my experience, are particularly excited by younger scientists (of any gender) who really want to learn and develop as future research leaders.

To cite this article, please use: Kirsten Spry, "Question Time", Elsevier Editors' Update, Issue 23, August 2008

Please send responses to: EditorsUpdate@Elsevier.com