Celebrating Women in Science

A study of science awards over twenty years shows persistent underrepresentation of women among the winners, and identifies remedies that can help build more rewarding careers for women in science.

The scientific contributions of women are often valued less than those of men, or overlooked, or even credited to men — a phenomenon known as the Matilda Effect. Not only does this impact the awards and recognition that women receive for their work in science, but it also results in fewer women being involved in the awards process.

In 2012, Lincoln and colleagues reviewed all awards given by 13 different disciplinary societies in the physical sciences, biomedical sciences and mathematics between 1991 and 2010. The analysis showed that the number of women receiving awards for teaching, service or research has increased over the years. However, at all ranks, women won a larger proportion of teaching and service awards but a significantly smaller proportion of research awards, which are considered more prestigious and more important in an academic career. While this disparity was expected to decrease over time as more women rose to senior research positions, the difference actually grew in the 2000’s compared to the previous decade. Hence the lack of women winning research awards cannot be fixed by merely waiting for women to move up through the ranks. Furthermore, women-only awards can camouflage the problem, marginalize women’s research, and further reduce their nominations for the more prestigious unrestricted research awards.

The evidence indicates that the lack of women winning research awards is not just because they are not being nominated, but because of the persistence of the Matilda Effect. Gender discrimination and biases about the lower importance of women’s scientific contributions disadvantage women in the awards process. These findings thus identify possible remedies that focus on addressing implicit bias and restructuring the awards process. Recommendations include increasing the number of women nominated for awards, including more women on award selection committees and as Chairs of the committees, increasing awareness of implicit biases, reviewing the portfolio of awards, and monitoring standards to ensure equitable representation and distribution of awards.

Join our mailing list to receive new WinSights articles on research-backed resources for inclusive science.

Study Details

Sample size(s): N/A

Participants: Awards data from 13 societies in the physical sciences, biomedical sciences, and mathematics from 1991–2010

Design: Qualitative, meta-analysis

Reference:

Lincoln, A. E., Pincus, S., Koster, J. B., & Leboy, P. S. (2012). The Matilda Effect in science: Awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and 2000s. Social Studies of Science, 42(2), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711435830

Summarized by WinSights team members: Emily Ana Butler, Bianca Dreyer, Catherine Palm & Aneeka Sooch