WELCOME TO THE FIRST WEDNESDAY
AFTERNOON LECTURE OF 2022.
I HOPE YOU ALL MANAGED TO HAVE A
BREAK OVER THE NEW YEAR AND I'M
CHIEF THE SECTION OF
DEVELOPMENTAL AT THE NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH.
I'M TRULY EXCITED TO INTRODUCE
TODAY'S SPEAKER, PROFESSOR DANI
BASSETT, DISCUSSING WHAT CAN BE
DESCRIBED AS THE SCIENCE OF
SCIENCE AND THE BIASES THAT THIS
CAN REVEAL IN THE WAYS WE WORK.
OUR SPEAKER TODAY IS THE
JAY PETER AND PROFESSOR OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA AND
APPOINTMENTS AT THE DEPARTMENTS
OF BIO ENGINEERING AND SYSTEMS
AGAIN AND IT GIVES YOU A HINT
THAT DIVERSITY OF THE PHENOMENAL
RESEARCH PROGRAMME OF PROFESSOR
BASSETT.
WE HAVE AN ACADEMIC APPOINTMENT
AT THE SANTA FE INSTITUTE.
DANI IS BEST KNOWN FOR BLENDING
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING TO IDENTIFY
FUNDAMENTAL MECHANISMS OF
COGNITION AND DISEASE IN HUMAN
BRAIN NETWORKS AND DANI LEADS
THE COMPLEX SYSTEMS LAB TO LINK
PROBLEMS WITH BASIC SCIENCE,
ENGINEERING AND CLINICAL
MEDICINE THAT CAN BE TACKLED
USING SYSTEM LEVEL APPROACHES.
SHE RECEIVED AN UNDERGRADUATE
AGREE FROM PEN STATE UNIVERSITY
AND A PH.D FROM CAMBRIDGE AS A
CHURCHILL SCHOLAR AND ONE OF OUR
OWN NIH HEALTH SCIENCES SCHOLARS
AND FOLLOWING THE POSTDOC TO BAL
POSITION AT UC.
>> Sandy: THEY WERE A JUNIOR
SANTA BARBRA AND THE GENIUS
GRANT IN 2014 AND THE NAME OF
ALFRED P. SLOAN RESEARCH FELLOW
IN 2014 AND IF I PRONOUNCED THAT
CORRECTLY IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS
SCIENCE IN 2017 AND THE PRIZE IN
NETWORK SCIENCE IN 2018 AND MOST
RECENTLY, DANNY WAS NAMED AN
AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY FELLOW
IN 2021 AND HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED
AS ONE OF THE WEB OF SCIENCES
MOST HIGHLY CITED RESEARCHERS
FOR SEVERAL YEARS RUNNING.
AND DANI'S WORK AND INCLUDING
NIH AND AND RESEARCH AND THE
FOUNDATION AND THE JOHN
CATHERINE T. MACK AUTHOR
FOUNDATION AND THE BOOK COMING
OUT THIS YEAR FROM M.I.T. PRESS
CO-AUTHORED IS TITLED "CURIOUS
MINDSMINDS, THE POWER OF CONNECTION"
AND I WANT TO SHARE A PERSONAL
REFLECTION OF SOMEONE LUCKY
ENOUGH TO WORK CLOSELY TO FOLLOW
CLOSELY DANI'S WORK AS A
COLLEAGUE AND COLLABORATE OR.
IT'S HARD TO OVER STATE THE
EXTENT TO WHICH WORKING WITH
DANI IS REALLY FLOORING
EXPERIENCE, BY THEIR PROFOUND
CREATIVITY INTELLECTUAL
FLEXIBILITY AND CLOSE ATTENTION
TO DOUGH TAIL AND REALLY
INSPIRATIONAL COLLEGIALITY.
THEY'VE HAD AN IMPACT ON THE WAY
I DO SCIENCE AND THE WAY I THINK
ABOUT BEING A SCIENTIST AND I
KNOW I'M NOT ALONE IN THIS SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DANI, FOR
ALL OF THIS AND THANK YOU FOR
BEING HERE WITH US TODAY AND I
AM REALLY EXCITED TO HEAR YOUR
TALK ON THINKING CRITICALLY
ABOUT HOW WE DO SCIENCE.
I'LL LET YOU TAKE IT OVER.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE
EXTREMELY KIND REMARKS, AND ALL
OF YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE
HERE TODAY.
SO, JESS, I TITLED THIS TALK
THINKING ABOUT HOW WE DO SCIENCE
AND I SUPPOSE I'LL JUST START BY
SAYING THAT I ABSOLUTELY LOVE
SCIENCE.
I LOVE SCIENCE FOR A WHOLE BUNCH
OF REASONS.
I LOVE THE ENDS OF SCIENCE, I
LOVE THE PROCESS OF SCIENCE, AND
I LOVE THE PEOPLE OF SCIENCE.
I LOVE THE INTO INTOXICATING FEELING
OF DISCOVERY.
ONE RECENT ONE WAS THE DISCOVERY
OF SPRING TALES FROM WHICH I
LEARNED MY JEALOUSY OF YELLOW
BEINGS AND STAR BUSSED CAN OCCUR
IN THE UNLIKELY PLACES, LOOK AT
THIS INCREDIBLE STAR BURST OF
WHITE HAIRS ON THIS PURPLE
SPRING TAIL AND IT COMES IN ALL
SIZE ZOOS HERE THE SPECIES.
BUT IN ADDITION TO DISCOVERY, I
LOVE THE POTENTIAL TO DO
SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE WORLD.
THE POTENTIAL FOR THERAPY, AND
THE POTENTIAL FOR CURE.
IN ADDITION TO THE ENDS OF
SCIENCE, I LOVE THE PRECISION OF
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD POSING A
QUESTION, BREAKING THE QUESTION
DOWN INTO OBJECTS AND PROCESSES
AND DEVELOPING A WAY TO MEASURE
THOSE OBJECTS AND PROCESSES,
DEVISING A HYPOTHESIS AND NULL
HYPOTHESIS, DEVISING AN
EXPERIMENT TO REFUTE ONE OF THE
HYPOTHESIS AND CARRYING IT OUT
TO GET A CLEAN RESULT.
I LOVIN' DUCI LOVE INDUCTIVE INFERENCE FRO M
FACTS TO PRINCIPLES.
AND I LOVE THE PEOPLE OF
SCIENCE.
WITH ALL OF OUR FANTASTIC
PERSONALITY QUIRKS AND ANNOYING
PARTICULAR AARTIS OF MOSTLY
MENTION MY OWN.
I LOVE THAT WE ARE CRITICAL THAT
WE USE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS AND
EVALUATION IN ORDER TO FORM A
JUDGMENT AND I LOVE THAT WE'RE
SKEPTICAL THAT WE'RE NOT EASILY
CONVINCED WITHOUT ROOMS OF DATA
AND WE DOUBT UNTIL THE EVIDENCE
IS OVERWHELMING.
I LOVE THAT WE SEEK TO BE
OBJECTIVE, THAT WE TRY TO LEAVE
OUR PERSONAL FEELINGS AND
OPINIONS OUTSIDE OF THE LAB.
AND COME TO EVERY OPEN
SCIENTIFIC QUESTION FAIRLY AND
WITHOUT BIAS.
SCIENCE TO ME IS A BEAUTIFUL
RATIONAL PROCESS OF HIGHLY
STRUCTURED INQUIRY THAT ALLOWS
US TO LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR
WORLD.
WE SEE PAST OLD THEORIES AND
BUILD NEW ONES AND WE REALISE A
PHENOMENON CURSE BECAUSE OF THIS
AND NOT THAT.
THE SCEPTIC WE SPAR WITH OUR OWN
INTERNAL MODELS OF HOW THINGS
MIGHT HAPPEN, ALWAYS QUESTIONING
EVER CRITICAL, RARELY CERTAIN.
WHAT IF WE WERE TO TURN THIS AWE
DID AUDACIOUS QUESTIONING OF HOW WE
DO SCIENCE.
MORE SPECIFICALLY A HUMAN
PHENOMENON.
THIS QUERY DRIVES THE FIELD OF
SCIENCE, HOW DOES SCIENCE
HAPPEN?
HOW DO WE CHOSE SCIENTIFIC
QUESTIONS TO PURSUE?
HOW DO WE MAP FIELDS OF INQUIRY?
HOW DO WE DETERMINE WHERE THE
FRONTIERS ARE AND THEN STEP
BEYOND THEM?
THE FIELD OF SCIENCE COMBINES
INFORMATION FROM THE PROCESS OF
SCIENCE, STATISTICS AND MACHINE
LEARNING, AND BIG DATA TO ANSWER
THESE TYPES OF QUESTIONS.
I LOVE THIS ILLUSTRATION FROM
NICOLE IN SCIENCE MAGAZINE
DEPICTING THE NOTION THAT
SCIENCE IS AN EX PANNING AND
EVOLVING NETWORK OF IDEAS,
SCHOLARS, AND PAPERS.
SCIENCE OF SCIENCE SEARCHES FOR
UNIVERSAL AND DOMAIN-SPECIFIC
LAWS UNDERLYING THE STRUCTURE
AND DYNAMICS OF SCIENCE.
TO GIVE YOU A BETTER INTUITION
FOR THE WORK THAT ARE DONE IN
THIS FIELD LET ME MENTION THROW
RECENT PAPERS.
FIRST THIS PAPER IN THE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL
ACADEMY OF THE SCIENCES AND
TITLED "THE DIVERSITY INNOVATION
PARADOX IN SCIENCE.
IN THIS PAPER, THE INVESTIGATORS
STUDIED 1.2 MILLION U.S.
DOCTORAL RECIPIENTS FROM 1977 TO
2015.
FOLLOWING THEIR CAREERS INTO
PUBLISHING AND FACULTY
POSITIONS.
THEY USED TEXT ANALYSIS AND
MACHINE LEARNING TO SHOW THAT
UNDER REPRESENTED GROUPS PRODUCE
HIGHER RATES OF SCIENTIFIC
NOVELTY, HOWEVER, THEY'RE NOVEL
CONTRIBUTIONS ARE DEVALUED AND
DISCOUNTED.
OR CONSIDER THIS PAPER ALSO
PUBLISHED IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF
THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF THE
SCIENCES TITLED "PRODUCTIVITY,
PROMINENCE AND THE EFFECTS OF
THE ACADEMIC ENVIRONMENTS" THE
INVESTIGATORS STUDIED THE CAREER
AND PRODUCTIVITY TRAJECTORIES OF
2,453 EARLY CAREER FACULTY AT
ALL 205 PH.D GRANTING COMPUTER
SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS IN THE
UNITED STATES AND CANADA WHO
TOGETHER ACCOUNTED FOR OVER
200,000 PUBLICATION AND
7.4 MILLION CITATIONS.
INVESTIGATORS FOUND THAT THE
SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTIVITY OF EARLY
CAREER FACULTY IS DRIVEN BY
WHERE THEY WORK, RATHER THAN
WHERE THEY TRAIN FOR THEIR
DOCTOR AT INDICATING A LIMITED
ROLE FOR DOCTORAL PRESTIGE IN
PREDICTING SCIENTIFIC
CONTRIBUTIONS AND MORE ROLE FOR
THE PRESTIGE OF THE INSTITUTION
IN WHICH THEY CURRENTLY WORKED.
AS A THIRD EXAMPLE, TAKE THIS
PAPER FROM COLLEAGUES PUBLISHED
TITLED "GLOBAL GENDER
DISPARITIES IN SCIENCE."
THE INVESTIGATORS STUDIED OVER
5 MILLION RESEARCH PAPERS AND
REVIEW ARTICLES WITH OVER
27 MILLION AUTHORSHIPS.
THEY FIND THAT PAPERS WITH WOMEN
IN KEY AUTHORSHIP POSITIONS ARE
CITED LESS THAN PAPERS WITH MEN
IN KEY AUTHORSHIP POSITIONS AND
THIS OBSERVATION WAS TRUE
WHETHER THE PAPE PAPER UNDER
CONSIDERATION WAS SINGLE
AUTHORED, FROM NATIONAL
COLLABORATION OR INTERNATIONAL
COCOLLABORATIONS SO THE WOMEN WERE
IN RED AND THE MEN IN BLUE AND
ACROSS EACH OF THESE YOU CAN SEE
A GENDER GAP HERE, AND HERE AND
THE NATIONAL COLLABORATIONS HERE
AND IN THE INTERNATIONAL
COLLABORATIONS.
SO, ALREADY WITH JUST THESE
THREE EXAMPLES, WE HAVE SEEN
THAT GENDER, RACE, AND CLASS OR
PRESTIGE STRUCTURE SCIENCE
CALLING INTO QUESTION MY
YOUTHFUL HOPES FOR OBJECTIVITY.
OF THESE THREE EXAMPLES, I WILL
NOW FOCUS ON THE STUDY OF THE
CITATION GENDER GAP AND ASK WHY
IT MATTERS?
HOW PREVALENT IT IS AND HOW IT
ARISES.
SO WHY DOES THE CITATION GAP
MATTER?
WELL, AS Dr. SARAH AHMED
REMARKS, CITATIONS CAN BE
THOUGHT OF AS ACADEMIC BRICKS.
THEY ARE ACADEMIC BRICKS IN TWO
SENSES.
FIRST THEY ARE THE BUILDING
BLOCKS OF ACADEMIC CAREERS.
THEY'RE OFTEN A MEASURE USED AS
A MEASURE OF SUCCESS AND TO
DETERMINE COMPENSATION AND
PROMOTION AND TO VALUE EIGHT IN
GRANT AND OTHER FUNDING AWARDS.
THEY'RE ALSO USED AS BUILDING
BLOCKS OF COLLABORATIVE
OPPORTUNITIES AND DETERMINE TO
SOME DEGREE SPEAKING
INVITATIONS.
SO IN THESE SENSES, CITATIONS
ARE BUILDING BLOCKS OF ACADEMIC
CAREERS AND THEY'RE MORE THAN
THAT, THEY'RE ALSO BUILDING
BLOCKS OF WHOLE FIELDS OF
INQUIRY SO THEY MAP SCHOLARLY
FIELDS FOR US.
THEY ALSO DEFINE THE SPACE OF
INQUIRY IN WHICH WE'RE ALL
WORKING.
CITATIONS ALSO DETERMINE THE
SCOPE OF QUESTIONS CONSIDERED
AND WHOSE QUESTIONS ARE
CONSIDERED AND HOW.
AND THEY RECORD A HISTORY OF
SCIENTIFIC IDEAS.
AS ACADEMIC BRICKS CITATIONS CAN
BUILD A MORE DIVERSE SCIENTIFIC
COMMUNITY OR THEY CAN ERECT
WALLS OF EXCLUSION.
SO, LET'S DIG INTO ONE
PARTICULAR EXAMPLE AND THIS WILL
BE NEUROSCIENCE.
ACROSS 61,416 ARTICLES, IN FIVE
TOP NEUROSCIENCE JOURNALS, THE
PREPORTION OF ARTICLES WITH A
WOMAN'S NAME AS FIRST OR LAST,
SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BETWEEN
1995 AND 2018 AT A RATE OF .6%
POINTS PER YEAR.
AND WHEN I SAY WOMEN AND MEN
OVER THE NEXT FEW SLIDES, WHAT I
MEAN IS THAT THE PROBABILITY OF
THE PERSON'S GENDER IS BEING
ASSIGNED BASED ON SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION DATABASE
AND GENDER A.P.I. WHICH PROVIDE
THE PROBABILITIES THAT A GIVEN
FIRST NAME BELONGS TO A MAN OR
WOMAN ACCORDING TO THE SEX THAT
THEY ARE ASSIGNED AT BIRTH OR TO
THE GENDER OR SEX THEY WERE
LATER IN LIFE.
DUE TO THE PUBLIC NATURE OF
THESE DATABASES AUTHORS IN THE
MAN AND WOMEN BINS COULD BE OF
ANY GENDER INCLUDING TRANS
WOMEN, TRANS WOMEN, GENDER
DIVERSE AND TWO SPIRIT, ET
CETERA.
NEVERTHELESS, THE WOMEN WILL
CONTAIN WOMEN AND THE MEN BIN
WILL HAVE MEN.
SO, IN THESE DATA WE CAN TEST
THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE UNDER
CITATION OF WOMEN CONSISTENT
WITH WHAT THEY SHOWED.
SO, TO DO THAT, FOR EACH OF THE
31,000 CITING PAPERS BETWEEN
SHANIA TWAIN AND 2018, WE TOOK
THE SUBSET OF ITS CITATIONS THAT
HAD BEEN PUBLISHED IN ONE OF THE
TOP NEURO SCIENTISTS SINCE 1995
AND PREDICTED THE FIRST AND LAST
AUTHORS AND REMOVED
SELF-CITATIONS BECAUSE WE WERE
REALLY WANTING TO FOCUS ON HOW
EACH OF US ENGAGES WITH THE WORK
OF OTHERS AND RATHER THAN HOW WE
ENGAGE WITH THE WORK OF
OURSELVES.
WE CALCULATED THE NUMBER OF
CITED PAPERS THAT FELL INTO EACH
OF FOUR CATEGORIES.
SO, FIRST AUTHOR AND LAST AUTHOR
BEING OF THE GENDER MAN AND
WOMAN.
SO MAN, MAN PAPERS, WOMAN-MAN
PAPERS, MAN-WOMAN PAPERS AND
WOMAN-WOMAN PAPERS.
I'LL FORECAST THAT WE'RE GOING
TO BE DOING THE SAME THING FOR
RACE AND ETHNICITY IN A MOMENT
SO WE CAN SEE THE SIMILARITIES
BETWEEN THIS GENDER GAP AND A
RACIAL AND ETHNIC GAP.
SO, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE
WHETHER A GENDER GAP EXISTS IN
ANY GIVEN FIELD AND AGAIN WE'RE
JUST TAKING NEUROSCIENCE AS AN
EXAMPLE, WE NEED TO ESTIMATE THE
NUMBER OF CITATIONS THAT WOULD
BE EXPECTED FOR THAT PAPER AND
HOW DO WE DEFINE THOSE
EXPECTATIONS?
WELL, ONE REALLY SIMPLE THING
ONE CAN DO IS TO ASSUME OUR
REFERENCE LISTS ARE R RANDOM DRAWS
FROM THE LITERATURE AND BECAUSE
THE FIELDS OF NEUROSCIENCE OR OF
MEDICINE OR OF PHYSICS OR OF
ASTRONOMY BECAUSE THEY OFTEN
HAVE, RIGHT NOW, MORE MEN IN
THEM, THEN IF YOU TAKE A RANDOM
DRAW, FROM THAT, YOU WILL END UP
WITH A REFERENCE LIST THAT HAS
MORE PAPERS WRITTEN BY MEN THEN
PAPERS WRITTEN BY WOMEN SO
THAT'S THE RANDOM DRAW
EXPECTATION.
NOW THE QUESTION IS, ARE PAPERS
FROM THOSE GROUPS BEING CITED
ACCORDING TO THOSE PREPORTIONS
FROM A RANDOM DRAW OR ARE SOME
PAPERS BEING CITED MORE THAN OR
LESS THAN EXPECTED GIVEN THE
RANDOM DRAW?
SO THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT WE'RE
PLOTTING HERE, ALONG THE Y
ACTION I GUESS OF PERCENT OVER
AND UNDER CITATION AND WHAT YOU
CAN SEE IN NEUROSCIENCE
CONSISTING WITH WHAT THEY SHOWED
IS THAT PAPERS WITH A MAN FIRST
AND LAST AUTHOR ARE OVER CITED
BY 11.6% AND PAPERS WITH A WOMAN
AS FIRST AND LAST AUTHOR ARE
UNDER CITED BY 30.2% FOR A
DIFFERENCE OF OVER 40%.
NOW, YOU MIGHT SAY AND MANY OF
THE PEOPLE IN OUR FIELDS DO,
WHEN I PUT TOGETHER MY REFERENCE
LIST, I DEFINITELY DON'T TAKE
OUT RANDOM DRAW, THERE ARE
FACTORS THAT COME INTO PLAY WHEN
I CHOSE WHAT PAPER TO CITE.
AND THOSE FACTORS MIGHT INCLUDE
THE YEAR OF PUBLICATIONS SO
PAPERS THAT ARE OLDER HAVE MORE
CITATIONS THAN PAPERS THAT ARE
NEWER.
I MIGHT CARE ABOUT THE JOURNAL
THE PAPER WAS PUBLISHED IN, EVEN
AMONG THE TOP FIVE JOURNALISM IN
THE FIELD THERE'S A DIFFERENCE
IN THE PERCEIVED IMPACT FACTOR
OF ONE JOURNAL VERSUS ANOTHER.
SO THAT MIGHT HAVE A ROLE TO
PLAY.
I MAY ALSO CITE PAPERS THAT HAVE
FEWER OR MORE AUTHORS
DIFFERENTLY AND I WILL
DEFINITELY SITE A REVIEW PAPER
DIFFERENTLY.
REVIEW PAPERS RECEIVE MORE
CITATIONS ON AVERAGE AND THE
SENIORITY OF THE PAPER MIGHT BE
IMPORTANT IN HOW I CHOSE TO
SITE.
WE CAN ACCOUNT INSIDE THE
STATISTICAL MODEL WHICH IS A
GENERALIZED ADDITIVE MODEL AND
BY FOR BIDDING THAT GAM TO THE
DATA, WE CAN THEN OBSERVE
WHETHER THERE ARE SOME GROUPS
THAT ARE OVER OR UNDER CITED,
GIVEN ALL OF THESE ADDITIONAL
FACTORS.
WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS THE SAME
RESULT HOLDS, WHICH IS THAT
PAPERS WITH A MAN FIRST AUTHOR
AND A MAN LAST AUTHOR ARE STILL
OVER CITED AND PAPERS WITH A
WOMAN FIRST AND LAST AUTHOR ARE
UNDER CITED NOW BY 13.9%.
SO, ALTHOUGH THE EXTENT OF THE
DIFFERENCE IS SOMEWHAT SMALLER,
THE TRENDS ARE STILL THE SAME.
SO, THESE ARE DISCREPANCIES THAT
ARE NOT PREDICTED BY ANYTHING
OTHER THAN GENDER.
SO, THEN WE CAN ASK, DO YOU MEN
AND WOMEN SITE SIMILARLY OR
DISSIMILARLY AND I'M GOING TO
ASK THE SAME QUESTION IN A FEW
SLIDES ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE
WHITE OR PEOPLE OF COLOUR.
SO, WE FIND THAT IN BALANCE
WITHIN REFERENCE LISTS SHOW
PREVIOUSLY IS LARGELY DRIVEN BY
THE CITATION PRACTISES OF
MAN-MAN TEAMS AND IS
SIGNIFICANTLY MITIGATE IN THE
CITATION OF TEAMS THAT HAVE A
WOMAN.
THE MAN-MAN TEAM AND THE
OVER-UNDER CITATION AND THE FOUR
GROUPS SO YOU CAN SEE AGAIN, THE
OVER CITATION OF THE MAN-MAN
PAPERS AND THE UNDER CITATION OF
THE WOMEN-WOMEN PAPERS.
YOU CAN SEE THAT EFFECT IS
LARGELY MITIGATE IN THE GROUPS
THAT HAVE A WOMAN IN ONE OF THE
TWO PRIMARY AUTHOR POSITIONS.
SO THIS SUGGEST THAT MEN AND
WOMEN ARE NOT CITING SIMILARLY
AND AS WE'LL SEE IN A FEW
SLIDES, WHITE PEOPLE AND PEOPLE
OF COLOR ARE ALSO NOT CITING
SIMILARLY.
SUGGESTS THERE MAY BE SOMETHING
BROADER GOING ON.
A QUICK FOOT NOTE BEFORE I MOVE
INTO RACE AND ETHNICITY IS THAT
I SOON LEARNED A GOOD HEART,
WHICH I THINK I HAVE, DOESN'T
SAVE YOU SO HERE ARE MY
REFERENCE LISTS PRE 2019 WHEN
THE LEAD AUTHOR OF THIS STUDY
JORDAN SHARED WITH ME HIS
FINDINGS AND WE STARTED TO PUT
TOGETHER THE PAPER SO I ASKED
HIM TO LOOK AT ALL OF MY
CITATIONS PRE 2019.
YOU SEE A REALLY EGREGIOUS
GROUPS LARGER THAN EXPECTED FOR
WOMAN-WOMAN FOR THE AVERAGE
SCHOLAR.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING TO BE
PROUD OF.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT I CAN
CHANGE AND HAVE CHANGED POST
2019.
SO, I WANT TO MOVE ON TO RACE
AND ETHNICITY.
AND TO DO THIS WORK WE EXPANDED
OUR COLLABORATIVE TEAM TO
INCLUDE INDIVIDUALS WITH
SCHOLARLY AND EXPERTISE YOU
MIGHT SEE A FEW FAMILIAR FACES.
I WANTED TO PARTICULARLY
HIGHLIGHT Dr. FAIR, Dr.
MORLAND AND WAS NAMED THE 2020
ALLEN INSTITUTE NEXGEN LEADER
AND KAF WHO DZIRASA.
WE DESIGNED AN AUTHOR, RACE AND
ETHNICITY TO AN EXPANDED DATA
SET AGAIN IN NEUROSCIENCE SO WE
USE DATABASES AND A DEEP NEURAL
NETWORK THAT LEARNS THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE NAMES
AND THE RACIAL OR ETHNIC
CATEGORIES AND IN THREE
DIFFERENT DATASETS SO THE
FLORIDA VOTER REGISTRATION DATA,
A U.S. CENSUS SET AND THE
WIKIPEDIA ENTER TREES AND THE
FLORIDA AND U.S. CENSUS WILL BE
ROW FLECK TIVE OF THE
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE NAMES
AND RACES AND ETHNICITY IN THE
U.S. AND THE WIKIPEDIA IS
INTERNATIONAL SO IT WILL BE
REFLECTIVE OF THOSE ASSOCIATIONS
IN THE BROADER POPULATION.
AND THE APPROACH WE USE ALLOWS
US TO ESTIMATE THE PROBABILITY
DISTRIBUTION ACROSS FOUR RACIAL
OR ETHNIC CATEGORIES.
ASIAN, BLACK, HISPANIC AND
WHITE.
BASED ON EACH AUTHOR'S FIRST AND
LAST NAMES.
SO NOW, I'LL CROSS 63,000
ARTICLES, THE PREPORTION OF
ARTICLES WITH A PERSON OF COLOR,
AS FIRST OR LAST AUTHOR
SUGGESTLY INCREASED BETWEEN 1995
AND 2019 AT A RATE OF ROUGHLY
.49% PER YEAR.
THE PAPER AND FIRST AND LAST
POSITION AND THE PAPERS IN BLUE
ARE PAPERS THAT HAVE A WHITE
FIRST AND LAST AUTHOR.
ZOO YOU CASO YOU CAN SEE THE DIVERSITY IN
THIS FIELD.
WE'RE GOING TO TEST THE SAME
SIMPLE HYPOTHESIS IN THE
PREVIOUS DATA SET SO WE'LL ASK
OUR WHITE PAPERS FROM WHITE AND
WHAT ABOUT PAPERS FROM AUTHORS
OF COLOR.
HERE, ALONG THE Y AXIS YOU ARE
SEEING THE PERCENT OVER AND
UNDER CITATION ACCORDING TO THE
RANDOM DRAWS MODEL SO THAT'S
WHERE WE TAKE A RANDOM DRAW FROM
THE REFERENCES PAPERS AVAILABLE
IN THE FIELD AND BECAUSE THERE
WILL BE MORE PAPERS FROM WHITE
PEOPLE THEY'LL BE MORE WHITE
PAPERS IN THE REFERENCE LIST AND
THE QUESTION IS DO WE SITE
ACCORDING TO THAT PROBABILITY SO
DO WE OVER SITE THE WHITE PAPERS
OR UNDER SITE THE PAPERS FROM
PEOPLE OF COLOR.
SO, WHAT WE FIND IS THAT IN
DEED, AS A FIELD, IN
NEUROSCIENCE, OVER CITE PAPERS
FROM WHITE AUTHOR BY 8% HERE AND
WE UNDER CITE PAPERS FROM
AUTHORS OF COLOR BY 17.2%.
WE CAN SPLIT THAT DATA UP INTO
WHO IS DOING THE CITING SO WE
FIND THAT WHITE CITERS ARE LIKE
ME.
PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE OVER CITING
OTHER PAPERS FROM WHITE SCHOLARS
AND THAT'S BY 12% POINTS AND
PEOPLE LIKE ME UNDER CITE AUTHOR
ARE COLOR AND THAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE OF OVER A 34% POINTS
IF YOU LOOK AT AND COLOR AND
PAPERS FROM WHITE SCHOLARS AND
UNDER CITING FROM AUTHORS OF
COLOR IT WAS TO A MUCH LOWER
DEGREE THAN WE SEE IN THE WHITE
CITERS SO THAT SUGGESTS THAT A
LARGE EFFECTS IS BEING
SIGNIFICANTLY DRIVEN BY MORE AND
WE CAN ASK NOT JUST ABOUT THE
MODEL BUT TAKING THE OTHER
FACTORS THAT MAY IMPACT THE WAY
WE SITE SO THE PUBLICATION OF
THE ARTICLE AND THE FIRST AND
LAST AUTHORS WHETHER IT WAS A
REVIEW ARTICLE OR AN EMPIRICAL
PAPER AND IN ADDITION WE ALSO
INCLUDED THE LOCATION OF THE
AUTHORS' INSTITUTION INSIDE OUR
STATISTICAL MODEL TO ACCOUNT FOR
GEOGRAPHIC AT VARIATIONS IN RACE
AND ETHNICITY.
SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE, IS THE
OVER ALL TRENDS STILL HOLD SO
PAPERS FROM AUTHOR WHO ARE WHITE
ARE OVER CITED AND PAPERS FROM
AUTHORS OF COLOR ARE
SIGNIFICANTLY UNDER CITED AND
THE MAJORITY OF THAT EFFECT IS
BEING DRIVEN BY WHITE PEOPLE
LIKE ME, RATHER THAN CITERS OF
COLOR.
NOW, YOU CAN PUT THE TWO PIECES
OF DATA TOGETHER AND I THINK
THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT, WHICH
IS TO UNDERSTAND HOW
INTERSECTIONALITY PLAYS OUT IN A
WAY THAT SCIENCE IS BEING
UNDERSTOOD AND VALUED AND ENGAGE
WITH AND SO HERE WHAT YOU ARE
SEEING IS ALONG THE Y AXIS THE
FIRST AUTHOR OF THE PAPER.
THE RACE AND ETHNICITY, WHITE,
ASIAN, HISPANIC AND BLACK AND
THE GENDER AND ALONG THE X AXIS
IS THE LAST AUTHOR OF THE PAPER.
SO JUST BY SQUINTING YOU CAN SEE
THERE'S A BLOCK DIAGONAL
STRUCTURE MEANING THERE'S RED IN
THE TOP LEFT AND DARK BLUE IN
THE BOTTOM RIGHT.
THAT'S THE GENDER EFFECT SO IN
THE TOP LEFT, WE HAVE PAPERS
THAT HAVE A MAN IN THE FIRST AND
LAST AUTHOR POSITION AND IN THE
BOTTOM RIGHT, WE HAVE PAPERS
THAT HAVE A WOMAN IN THE FIRST
AND LAST AUTHOR POSITION.
SO THIS BIG BLOCK THAT YOU SEE
IS A GENDER EFFECT AND THEN EVEN
BEYOND THE GENDER EFFECT WE CAN
SEE AN EFFECT OF RACE AND
ETHNICITY INSIDE OF ETCH OF
THESE BLOCKS AND SO HERE I'LL
JUST POINT OUT THE LARGEST AND
LOWEST OF NUMBERS.
THE PAPERS FROM A WHITE FIRST
AUTHOR AND LAST AUTHOR ARE OVER
CITED BY 24% AND PAPERS FROM A
BLACK WOMAN AS FIRST AND LAST
AUTHOR ARE UNDER CITED BY 47%.
SO THAT IS AN OVER 70 POINT
DIFFERENCE.
AND THESE EFFECTS ARE AS I SAID,
BEING DRIVEN BY MAJORITIES
GROUPS AND SO MAJORITY BASED AND
MAJORITY GENDER AND
UNFORTUNATELY ARE ALSO
INCREASING WITH TIME.
SO, WE CAN ASK HOW SIMILAR
VERSUS DIFFERENT ARE THESE
TRENDS ACROSS FIELDS SO I WAS
SHOWING YOU NEUROSCIENCE AS A
EXAMPLE, CAN WE LOOK AT
INDIVIDUAL FIELDS AND SEE
WHETHER THERE ARE SIMILARITIES
VERSUS DIFFERENCES.
SO, HERE FOR EXAMPLE, IS A
WONDERFUL PAPER JUST PUBLISHED
RECENTLY IN NATURE ASTRONOMY AND
ALONG THE Y AXIS YOU SEE THE
MEASURED OR PREDICTED NUMBER
VERSUS PREDICTED NUMBER OF
CITATIONS AND ALONG THE X AXIS
IS THE YEAR AND THE
INVESTIGATORS STATE IN THEIR
PAPER THAT WE MEASURE AN AVERAGE
IN TRANSITION BIAS OF 10% SAYING
WOMEN RECEIVE 10% FEWER
CITATIONS THAN WOULD BE EXPECTED
IF THEY WERE MEN GIVEN THE NON
GENDER SPECIFIC PROPERTIES OF
THEIR PAPERS.
NOTICE THAT ASTRONOMY SEEMS TO
BE BETTER OVER TIME WHERE
NEUROSCIENCE IS DOING WORSE OVER
TIME.
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE FROM
COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE AS
ANOTHER FIELD AND YOU CAN SEE
THE GENDER CITATION IS HITTING
THE ZERO EXPECTATION MARK WITH
AN OVER CITATION OF THE PAPERS
AND UNCITED OF A WOMAN AND A
THEY STAY IN THEIR PAPER THE
RESULTS INDICATE TA PAPERS
AUTHORED BY MEN HAVE BEEN OVER
CITED COMPARED WITH WHAT WOULD
BE EXPECTED BASED ON PAPERS
PUBLISHED BY THE JOURNAL THAT
WERE AUTHORED BY MAN AND MAN
TEAMS.
TEAMS WITH AT LEAST ONE WOMAN
HAVE BEEN UNDER CITED.
NOW, CONSIDER MEDICINE.
SO WE'VE GOT NEUROSCIENCE,
ASTRONOMY, COGNITIVE
NEUROSCIENCE AND HERE IS
MEDICINE.
AND COLLEAGUES AND CHATTERJEE
STUDY THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
CITATIONS FOR ORIGINAL RESEARCH
ARTICLES AND PRIMARY AND SENIOR
AUTHOR GENDER PAIRS AND THIS IS
A CROSS SECTIONAL STUDY ACROSS
OVER 5,000 DIFFERENT ARTICLES
AND WHAT THE INVESTIGATORS FOUND
IS THAT PAPERS WRITTEN BY WOMEN
AS PRIMARY ORSEN YEA OR SENIOR AUTHORS
ARTICLES WRITTEN BY WOMEN AS
BOTH PRIMARY AND SENIOR AUTHORS
HAD HALF THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS
AS THOSE AUTHORED BY MEN AS BOTH
PRIMARY AND SENIOR SO YOU CAN
SEE THOSE NUMBERS HERE WHEN THE
AUTHOR PAIR IS A WOMAN PRIMARY
AND SENIOR THE NUMBER OF
CITATIONS THAT WAS ACCUSED WAS
33 WHEN THE MAN IS PRIMARY AND
SEEN HERE THE NUMBER OF
CITATIONS ACCRUED WAS 59.
THESE WERE IN HIGH-IMPACT
JOURNALS OF MEDICINE.
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE IN PHYSICS.
SO, HERE IS THE PERCENT OVER AND
UNDER CITATION OF THE MAN-MAN
TEAMS VERSUS ALL THE OTHER TEAMS
AND THEN HERE IS BROKEN DOWN BY
SUB DISCIPLINE IN PHYSICS SO
IT'S AMO AND CM AND NUCLEAR,
HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS, AND
ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS.
AND THE CITATION GENDER GAP
REACHES ABOUT 14% IN GENERAL
PHYSICS AND IS MOST EGREGIOUS IN
PAPERS IN HIGH-IMPACT JOURNALS.
THIS STUDY FINDS THAT THE
CITATION IMBALANCE IN FAVOR OF
MAN-AUTHORED PAPERS IS HIGHEST
FOR PAPERS AUTHORED BY MEN.
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE IN
COMMUNICATION SCIENCE.
HERE ALONG THE Y AXIS IS THE
OVER CITATION OF MAN-MAN PAPERS,
THESE INVESTIGATORS USE DATA
FROM 14 COMMUNICATION JOURNALS
FROM 1995 TO 2018 AND WE FIND
THAT REFERENCE LISTS INCLUDE
MORE PAPERS WITH MEN AS FIRST
AND LAST AUTHOR AND FEWER PAPERS
WITH WOMEN AS FIRST AND LAST
AUTHOR THAN WOULD BE EXPECTED IF
GENDER WERE UNRELATED TO
REFERENCING.
THIS IS DRIVEN BY PRACTICES OF
MEN.
IN OTHER FIELDS AND THIS IS THE
LAST EXAMPLE, I WANT TODAY GIVE
YOU A FLAVOR FOR HOW MANY
DIFFERENT FIELDS ARE FINDING THE
SAME THING SO HERE IN
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, A PAPER
FROM 2013 BY MILLENNIA STATES
THAT WOMAN ARE SYSTEMATICALLY
CITED LESS THAN MEN AFTER
CONTROLLING FOR A LARGE NUMBER
OF VARIABLES INCLUDING YEAR,
PUBLICATION, SUBSTANTIVE FOCUS,
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE, TENURE
STATUS AND INSTITUTIONAL A
FILLIZATION AND ARTICLES BY
WOMEN ARE SYSTEM ATLY ALL ELSE
SEEK THIS IS LIKELY BECAUSE AND
THEY GIVE SEVERAL FACTORS
INCLUDING THAT MEN WHO MAKE UP A
DIS PURPORTS ART SHARE CITE MORE
MEN THAN WOMEN.
IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND SOCIAL
SCIENCE, IN 2018 DION ETAL ALL
ARTICLES FROM 2007 TO 2016 THEY
FIND THAT FEMALE SCHOLARS ARE
MORE LIKELY THAN MIXED GENDER OR
MALE AUTHOR TEAMS TO CITE
RESEARCH BY FEMALE PEERS.
AND MITCHELL ET AL FINDS THAT
EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS SUGGESTS THAT
MALE AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN TWO
LARGE JOURNALS IN THE FIELD WILL
CITE WORK BY FEMALE SCHOLARS IN
COMPARISON WITH FEMALE AUTHORS.
SO, WITH ALL OF THAT DATA IN
FRONT OF US WE CAN ASK, WELL
WHAT'S DO WE DO ABOUT THIS AND
HOW DO WE THINK ABOUT IT AND HOW
DO WE THINK ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS
FOR SCIENCE?
SO, HERE ARE A COUPLE COMMON
EXPERIENCES THAT I'VE HEARD IN
RESPONSE TO THE DATA.
THE FIRST ONE IS WELL, WHITE
PEOPLE JUST WRITE THE BEST
PAPERS, SHRUG.
SECOND ONE IS WELL, MEN JUST
WRITE THE BEST PAPERS.
SHRUG.
THE THIRD ONE IS, I JUST CITE
GOOD SCIENCE I DON'T SEE RACE.
I DON'T SEE GENDER.
THE FOURTH ONE IS, I WORK IN THE
FIELD WHERE THERE ARE NO WOMEN
OR PEOPLE OF COLOR.
IT'S NOT MY FAULT, IT JUST IS.
THE FIFTH ONE IS I'M SURE I FEEL
IT'S DIFFERENT THERE ARE FAMOUS
WOMEN OR PEOPLE OF COLOR IN MY
FIELDS AND THE PERSON LISTS TWO
NAMES.
THE FINAL ONE SAY CAN'T BELIEVE
YOU ADMITTED TO UNDER CITING
WOMEN.
THE HORROR.
THOSE ARE THE COMMON RESPONSES
BUT I WANT TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE
CAN RESPOND AS SCIENTISTS TAKING
THAT WONDERFUL SCIENTIFIC BRAIN
THAT I LOVE IN ALL OF US AND
TURNING IT TOWARDS THESE DATA.
SO LET'S BE SCIENTISTS AND LET'S
BE SKEPTICAL, CRITICAL,
OBJECTIVE, AND LET'S BE
OBJECTIVE ABOUT US.
LET'S LOOK AT THE DATA AND THE
FACT THIS IS COMING UP IN MANY,
MANY DIFFERENT FIELDS AND IT'S
HAPPENING BOTH IN GENDER AND IN
RACE AND ETHNICITY.
THINK HARD ABOUT WHAT THAT MIGHT
MEAN.
WE CAN ALSO THINK OBJECTIVELY,
SCEPTICALLY, CRITICALLY ABOUT
ALL OF THE FURTHER DATA OUTSIDE
OF CITATIONS ABOUT GENDER AND
RACIAL INEQUALITIES AND BEING
PERVASIVE NOT JUST IN OUR WORLD
BUT ALSO IN ACADEMIA AND NOTE
THE PRIOR WORK THAT HAS REPORTED
GENDER AND RACIAL INEQUALITY IN
CONVERSATION AND IN GRANT
FUNDING AND IN CREDIT FOR
COLLABORATIVE WORK, TEACHING
EVALUATIONS AND HIRING AND
PROMOTION, PRODUCTIVITY AND
AUTHORSHIP.
WE SHOULD LOOK AT THESE DATA AND
RECOGNIZE THAT SCIENTISTS, ARE
NOT SOME SPECIAL BREED OF HUMANS
IMMUNE TO RACISM, SEXISM,
CLASSISM, ET CETERA.
BOTH IS SOMETHING WE HAVE INSIDE
OF US AND IN THERE IS SOMETHING
WE INHERIT THROUGH STRUCTURES OF
OPPRESSION IN THE INSTITUTIONS
AROUND US AND AROUND SCIENCE.
SO, LET'S BE SCIENTISTS AND
FIGURE OUT THE DRIVER OF THESE
INEQUALITIES.
ALTHOUGH THERE ARE A COUPLE
FACTORS THAT ARE VERY CLEAR.
THE FIRST ONE IS THAT SEVERAL OF
THE STUDIES SHOW THAT THE
CITATION IN EQUALITIES ARE
DRIVEN TO SOME DEGREE BY A
CITATION PRACTICE THAT HAS
REMAINED THE SAME SINCE 1995 AND
WHILE THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF OUR
COMMUNITIES HAVE CHANGED.
OUR FIELDS OF SCIENCE ARE
GROWING INCREASINGLY DIVERSE AT
A WONDERFUL RATE, IT'S NOT FAST
ENOUGH BUT IT'S BETTER THAN
ZERO.
OUR CITATION PRACTICES ARE NOT
KEEPING UP WITH WHO IS IN OUR
FIELD TODAY.
THEY LOOK MORE LIKE WHO WAS IN
OUR FIELD IN 1995.
SECOND, GENDER IMBALANCE IN
CO-AUTHOR SHIP IN THE CO-AUTHOR
SHIP NETWORK PARTIALLY EXPLAINS
THE GENDER IMBALANCE IN AUTHOR
CITATION BEHAVIOR SO IN OTHER
WORDS, IF I TEND TO COLLABORATE
WITH PEOPLE ONLY OF OR MOSTLY OF
A CERTAIN GENDER, WHO ARE MOSTLY
OF A CERTAIN RACE, THEN I WILL
ALSO END UP CITING ACCORDING TO
THOSE PROBABILITIES SO SOME
DEGREE.
THIS IS A CHALLENGE TO US TO
THINK DIFFERENTLY ABOUT HOW WE
CITE OUTSIDE OF OUR CO-AUTHOR
SHIP NETWORK AND TO CHANGE OUR
CO-AUTHORSHIP NETWORK TO BE
BROADER AND DIVERSE AND MORE
INCLUSIVE.
THIRD, RACIAL AND ETHNIC
SEGREGATION IN CO-AUTHORSHIP
NETWORKS IS INCREASING DESPITE
GREATER FIELD-WIDE
COLLABORATION.
AND FOURTH, I THINK I MENTIONED
THIS A LITTLE BIT EARLIER BUT
ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT SEEMS TO
BE VERY CLEAR IS WE SITE PEOPLE
THAT ARE A LOT LIKE US OF OUR
OWN GENDER AND OUR OWN ETHNICITY
AND RACE.
THIS IS CALLED HAMAFALY AND IT'S
PREVALENT ACROSS THESE FIELDS
THAT I'VE JUST CANVASSED FOR
YOU.
THERE'S AN INTERESTING PAPER
FROM JAMES EVANS PUBLISHED IN
2008 IN SCIENCE MAGAZINE THAT
WAS CALLED ELECTRONIC
PUBLICATION AND THE NARROWING OF
SCHOLARSHIP AND HE USES A
DATABASE OF 34 MILLION ARTICLES
AND THEIR CITATION 01945 TO
2005.
HE ALSO USED THE ON-LINE
AVAILABILITY FROM 1998 TO 2005.
HE SHOWS THAT AS MORE JOURNAL
ISSUES CAME ON-LINE, THE
ARTICLES REFERENCED INTENDED TO
BE MORE RECENT, FEWER JOURNALS
AND ARTICLES WERE CITED AND MORE
OF THOSE CITATIONS WERE TO FEWER
JOURNALS AND ARTICLES AND SO
SEARCHING ON-LINE IS MORE
EFFICIENT AND FOLLOW HYPER LINKS
CAN PUT RESEARCHERS INTO TOUCH
WITH PREVAILING OPINION BUT THIS
MAY ACCELERATE CONSENSUS AND
NARROW THE RANGE OF FINDINGS AND
IDEAS BUILT UPON.
I THINK THAT'S A CALL TO
DENARROWING.
AND LASTLY, LET'S BE SCIENTISTS
IN ATTEMPTING NOT JUST TO
IDENTIFY THE DRIVERS BUT
MITIGATING SOME OF THESE DRIVERS
OF INEQUALITIES SO ONE THING WE
CAN DO IS TO VERY QUICKLY CHECK
AND FIX OUR OWN REFERENCE LISTS
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO
REGULARLY.
WE USE THIS TOOLBOX WHERE ONE
PUT IN YOUR REFERENCE LIST AND
WHETHER YOU ARE CLOSE TO
EXPECTED PREPORTIONS OR FARTHER
FROM THEM AND YOU CAN THINK IF
YOU ARE FAR FROM THE EXPECTED
PREPORTIONS, WHAT IS IT THAT I'M
MISSING?
THE PEOPLE I'M MISSING ARE THE
PEOPLE THAT HAVE GOTTEN
FACULTIES POSITIONS IN THE LAST
FIVE TO 10 YEARS AND THESE ARE
THE PEOPLE THAT IT'S MY
RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW MORE
ABOUT AND WHOSE WORK IS MY
RESPONSIBILITY TO ENGAGE WITH IN
AN INTELLECTUAL WAY IN THE WORK
THAT I DO.
SECONDLY, ANOTHER OPTION IS TO
APPEND THE CITATION DIVERSITY
STATEMENT TO MY PAPER, WHICH
I'LL MENTION ON THE NEXT SLIDE
AND THE THIRD IS TO BRING MORE
INEQUALITY TO LIGHT TO DEVELOP
MORE MITIGATION TOOLS, I'LL JUST
HIGHLIGHT A TOOL THAT'S
AVAILABLE ON THE WEB STORE
CALLED CITATION TRANSPARENCY AND
YOU CAN USE IT AND IT WAS
DEVELOPED BY JENNY AND YOU CAN
USE IT TO IDENTIFY AND
PREDICTIONS ABOUT AUTHOR
DEMOGRAPHICS AS YOU ARE SERVING
PUBMED OR GOOGLE SCHOLAR.
SO WHAT IS THE CITATION
DIVERSITY STATEMENT IDEA?
WELL THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WE'RE ATTENDING TO OUR PAPERS
AND MANY OTHER INVESTIGATORS ARE
DOING SO WELL AND IT HAS SEVERAL
SECTIONS AND MOTIVATIONS AND
METHODS, RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS
AND I'LL READ IS VERY BRIEFLY TO
YOU.
IT SAYS RECENT WORK HAS
IDENTIFIED A BUY AS IN CITATION
PRACTICES SUCH THAT PAPERS FROM
WOMEN AND OTHER MARGINALIZED
SCHOLARS SYSTEMS ARE UNDER CITED
RELATIVE TO THE NUMBER OF SUCH
PAPERS IN THE FIELD.
WE'RE WE SOUGHT TO CONSIDER
CHOOSING REFERENCES THAT REFLECT
THE DIVERSITY OF THE FIELD AND
THOUGHT FORM OF CONTRIBUTIONS,
GENDER AND OTHER FACTORS.
WE USED DATABASES THAT STORE THE
PROBABILITY OF A NAME BEING
CARRIED BY PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT
GENDERS TO HOLD OURSELVES
ACCOUNTABLE TO NOT PER WET WAIT
AND WE PLACE THE AUTHOR IN THE
VIN W IF THEY HAVE A NAME WITH A
PROBABILITY OF .7 OF MORE OF
BELONGING TO A WOMAN AND HE WITH
PLACE AN AUTHOR IN THE BIN M IF
THEY HAVE A NAME WITH A
PROBABILITY OF .7 OR MORE OF
BELONGING TO A MAN.
BASED ON THE DATABASE USED, THE
W WIN WILL HAVE WOMEN AND THE M
MEN WILL BE MEN BUT THEY MAY
CONTAIN OTHER GENDERS.
BY THIS MEASURE ARE REFERENCES
ARE LIKE THIS AND IN TERMS OF A
LITTLETATIONS WE SAY THIS METHOD
IS LIMITED IN THAT NAMES,
PRONOUNCE, SOCIAL IMMEDIATE WHY
PROFILES USE TO CONSTRUCT THE
DATABASES MAY NOT IN EVERY CASE
BE INDICATIVE OF GENDER IDENTITY
AND STUDIES OF NAMES CANNOT BE
USED TO DETECT COSTS THAT ARE
SPECIFIC TO INTERSECT
TRANSGENDER PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT
TO A LARGE NUMBER OF THEIR
COLLEAGUES.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO FUTURE WORK
THAT COULD HELP US BETTER
UNDERSTAND HOW TO HAVE EQUITABLE
PRACTICES AND SCIENCE.
WE DO THIS TO HOLD OURSELVES
ACCOUNTABLE.
TO INCREASE GLOBAL AWARENESS OF
CITATION IMBALANCE AND TO POINT
READERS TO RELEVANT TOOLS FOR
MITIGATING DISPARITIES.
COMMUNITIES RESPONSE HAS BEEN
OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE DESPITE
THE REMARKS THAT I READ TO YOU
EARLIER.
SO EDITORIALS FROM BRAIN, NATURE
NEUROSCIENCE, MANY OTHER
JOURNALS HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED AND
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE
PUBLISHED ITS TIME IN 2020 AND
SOME JOURNALS INCLUDING CITATION
BALANCE INDICATOR AND GIVING
THEM THE TOOLS TO EVALUATE THEIR
REFERENCES CRITICALLY AND MANY
HIGH-IMPACT JOURNALS ACROSS MANY
DIFFERENT FIELDS NOW HAVE
PUBLISHED CITATION DIVERSITY
STATEMENTS AND THE PRESS AND
INITIATED ITS INCLUSION AND
DIVERSITY STATEMENT IN 2021.
THE M.E.S. WHICH PUBLISHES FOUR
JOURNALS ALSO ENCOURAGES AUTHORS
TO INCLUDE TAY CITATION
DIVERSITY STATEMENT WITHIN THEIR
MANUSCRIPTS.
AND FOR THE PAPERS THAT HAVE
INCLUDED A CITATION DIVERSITY
STATEMENT OVER THE LAST
YEAR-AND-A-HALF, THOSE PAPERS
ARE CITING MUCH CLOSER TO THE
ZERO LINE SO HERE WHAT YOU CAN
SEE IS THE PRE 2020 OR 2019
CITATION PRACTICES AND THEN IN
THE DOTS ARE PAPERS THAT INCLUDE
A CITATION DIVERSE STATEMENT.
YOU CAN SEE THE DATA POINTS
INCLUDES ZERO IN ALL FOUR CASES
WHICH MEANS THAT THIS DISPARITY
HAS BEEN BROUGHT DOWN TO THE
EXPECTATION MARK.
WHICH I THINK IS A MARKET
PROGRESS.
BUT OF COURSE, IT'S ALWAYS MORE
THAN THE NUMBERS.
SO I WANT TO THANK MORE
CAREFULLY, MORE DEEPLY ABOUT
WHERE AND HOW WE CAN CITING.
ARE WE SLAPPING REFERENCES ON AT
THE END OR ENGAGING WITH THEM
END LEX ACTUAL FROINTELLECTUALLY FROM THE START.
INVITATIONS, MENTIONS, E-MAILS
AND AND SO IN CLOSING I JUST
WANTED THINK AGAIN AND HOW WE DO
AND THE GAP IS PART OF HOW WE DO
SCIENCE AND AS BUILDING BLOCKS
OF ACADEMICS CAREERS AND WHO
DOES SCIENCE AND WHO GETS TO DO
SCIENCE AND IT'S AS BUILDING
BLOCKS OF FIELDS OF INQUIRY THE
CITATION GAP IS ALSO ABOUT OUR
COLLECTIVE SPACE OF DISCOVERY
AND HOW MANY AND I THINK THE
BEAUTIFUL PHYSICS OF BRANCHED
FLOW AND SO FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO
DON'T KNOW ABOUT BRANCH FLOW
THIS IS THE BRANCH FLOW THE
LIGHT WHICH IS JUST AMAZING.
IN MANY KINDS OF IRREGULAR
MEDIA, AND I CALL SCIENCE AN
IRREGULAR MEDIA, PROPAGATING
WAVES ENTER THIS BEAUTIFUL AND
RELATIVELY NEGLECTED REGIME
CALLED BRANCHED FLOW AND IT
EFFECTS SOUND, LIGHT, WATER AND
MATTER WAVES OVER VASTLY
DIFFERENT LIGHT SCALES FROM THE
TINY TO TSUNAMIS.
IF OUR WAVES OF INQUIRY ARE
GUIDED TO NARROW BRANCHES
DEFINED BY A FAMOUS THINKINGER,
A RACE, SINGLE ETHNICITY, A
CERTAIN CLASS OR GIVEN PRESTIGE,
WHAT TREMENDOUS SWATHS OF
DISCOVERY OF SPACE ARE WE
LEAVING UNCONSIDERED,
UNEXAMINED, AND UNKNOWN?
I THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
TO USE THE BEAUTIFUL RATIONAL
PROCESS OF SCIENCE TO LEARN MORE
ABOUT HOW WE STRUCTURE OUR
INQUIRY.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE THE
SCEPTIC PARRING WITH OUR OWN
INTERNAL MODELS OF HOW WE DO
SCIENCE AND RARELY AND PERVASIVE
GENDER, RACIAL AND ETHNIC
INEQUALITIES MEAN THAT SCIENCE
ISN'T AS OBJECTIVE AS WE THINK
IT IS.
HOW CAN WE SEE PAST SCIENCE AND
HOW CAN WE LAY DOWN A NEW
PRACTICE FOR A SCIENCE OF
TOMORROW?
SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR LISTENING AND I'M HAPPY TO
GO TO THE QUESTION AND ANSWER
PERIOD.
>> THANK YOU FOR A FABULOUS
TALK.
I CAN HEAR APPLAUSE THROUGH THE
VIRTUAL NETWORK.
IT WAS A STUNNING, SOBERING AND
MOTIVATING WAY TO START THE NEW
YEAR.
THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.
WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS
ROLLING IN.
I MIGHT TAKE THE PRIVILEGE OF
SNEAKING IN ONE MYSELF.
LOOKING FORWARD TO THE FUTURE
AND I LIKE HOW WE CAN DIAGNOSE
THE DIFFICULTY AND THINK ABOUT
HOW INFORM CHANGE THINGS.
THE NARROW WAY OF HOPE AND DID
YOU FIND IF YOU STRATIFIED THE
CITATION PRACTICES BY THE
SENIORITY OF THE AUTHORS THAT
PEOPLE JUST COMING IN THEY MIGHT
BE A DIFFERENT FUTURE COMING,
NOT INFORM SAY WE SHOULDN'T BE
MORE PROACTIVE BUT THAT IS THERE
CHANGE ON THE HORIZON?
>> WE DID NOT STRA STRAT FIE BY AGE
OR SENIORITY.
WE IMPACTED ON THE MODEL BECAUSE
THAT'S HOW MUCH SOMEONE IS
CITED.
I DON'T HAVE DATA FOR THAT
QUESTION, HOWEVER, IT'S A GREAT
QUESTION AND I COULD ANSWER IT.
IF WE GO BACK TO THE COMPUTER
LATER TODAY.
SO, IT'S REALLY, I DO -- I WOULD
HAVE THAT HOPE.
IT'S PROBABLY THE CASE.
HOWEVER, I'M ALSO SOBERED BY MY
OWN CITATION PRACTICES BECAUSE I
THINK A LOT OF IT WAS JUST, I
WOULDN'T, I'M NOT YOUNG BUT I'M
NOT VERY OLD AND I WOULD HAVE
ASSUMED I SHOULD HAVE DONE
BETTER BUT I DIDN'T AND I THINK
IT'S BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW.
IT HADN'T OCCURRED TO ME THAT
THESE EFFECTS COULD BE HOLDING
AND ACROSS DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS
LIKE RACE, ETHNICITY AND GENDER
AND IT'S CLASS AND PRESTIGE AND
AWARE OF SOMEONE'S INSTITUTION
AND IT'S PUBLISHING THE PAPER.
I THINK THERE IS GOOD ON THE
HORIZON, HOWEVER, I THINK IT
DOES REQUIRE SOME AWARENESS.
YEAH.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
MAYBE ON THAT TOPIC BEFORE WE
DIVE INTO THE QUESTIONS THAT
CAME IN, WOULD YOU BE
COMFORTABLE SHARING A FEW KIND
OF PERSONAL EXPERIENCES THAT
YOU'VE HAD AS YOU'VE BEEN
NEGOTIATING THAT JOURNEY OF
CHANGING YOUR OWN CITATION
PRACTICES?
ARE THERE TIPS UP FOR PEOPLE?
>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
LIKE I MENTIONED, DURING THE
TALK, WHAT I REALIZED IS THAT
I'M NOT EDUCATED AND I'M NOT --
I NEED A PRACTICE OF
SELF-EDUCATION ON THE WORK OF
YOUNGER COLLEAGUES.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT HAS BEEN
MISSING FOR ME AND THAT'S WHAT I
FOUND TO BE THE MOST HELPFUL NOW
IS TO GO LISTEN TO THE TALKS OF
THE POSTDOCS WHO ARE ABOUT TO GO
ON THE MARKET.
LOOK UP THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE JUST
GOTTEN POSITIONS AT LOCAL
INSTITUTIONS AND LOOK AT THEIR
WORK.
I THINK IT'S VERY MUCH ABOUT NOT
ASSUMING I'LL JUST HEAR ABOUT
THE RELEVANT WORK BUT BECAUSE I
THINK THE HEARING ABOUT IT HAS
INEQUALITIES BUILT INTO IT TOO,
RIGHT.
AND SO I THINK THAT THERE'S JUST
A LITTLE BIT MORE EMPHASIS ON
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO
EDUCATE MYSELF ABOUT THE WORK OF
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN MY FIELD.
AND TO BE SKEPTICAL ABOUT THE
NOTION THAT I ALREADY KNOW MY
FIELDS.
I DON'T THINK ANY OF US DOES.
SO THERE'S A LOT MORE TO KNOW.
THERE ARE MANY MORE PEOPLE TO
KNOW AND THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK
FROM THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO KNOW
SO THAT'S BEEN THE MOST HELPFUL
OBSERVATION FOR ME.
>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT.
THAT'S A SUPER ACTIONABLE THING
THAT EVERYONE IS ENGAGE IN SO
THAT'S GREAT.
SO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT
CAME IN, ONE WAS FROM LAURA
CARTER AND HOW CAN YOU TELL WHO
ARE AUTHORS OF COLOR?
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
SO, IT DEPENDS.
SO I GUESS THERE ARE A
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- LET ME SAY
THE ALGORITHM.
IT TAKES FIRST AND LAST NAMES
AND EXAMINES THE PROBABILITY,
THE FREQUENCY OF LETTER PAIRS SO
IF L AND Z ARE NEXT TO ONE
ANOTHER IN THEIR FIRST OR LAST
NAME, THAT WOULD GIVE A CLUE
ABOUT THE RACE OR ETHNICITY OF
THAT PERSON IT COMES FROM THIS
LANGUAGE AND THAT LANGUAGE IS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS RACE AND
ETHNICITY SO IT'S A
LANGUAGE-BASED AND LETTER-PAIR
FREQUENCY-BASED ASSESSMENT.
SO, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT
THERE ARE FOR SURE JUST AS IN
GENDER, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE
IN THE MAY NOT APPEAR WHITE.
THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE
ASIAN BIN THAT MAY NOT APPEAR
ASIAN.
SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
A PERSON'S PHYSICAL APPEARANCE
OR VISIBLE IDENTITY AND THE
IDENTITY DERIVED FROM THEIR
NAME.
THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER YET
IDENTITY WHICH IS HOW THEY
IDENTIFY SO THAT WE OFTEN CALL
THAT SELF-ATTESTATION, THIS IS
THE RACE AND ETHNICITY I AM,
THIS IS THE GENDER I AM, ET
CETERA.
SO THERE'S AN INTERESTING MILIEU
OF WHAT ARE THE FEATURES THAT WE
SEE IN OTHERS?
DO I SEE YOU IN REAL LIFE OR DO
I JUST SEE YOUR NAME?
HAVE I ASKED YOU YOUR GENDER
IDENTITY?
THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT ARE
QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT ARE THE
PIECES OF INFORMATION THAT WE
HAVE JUST BY LOOKING AT PAPERS
AND THOSE PIECES OF INFORMATION
ARE COGNITIVE APPARATUS ARE USED
IMPLICITLY TO DRIVE CITATION
PRACTICES AND THEN WHAT ARE THE
PIECES OF INFORMATION WE KNOW
ABOUT OUR COLLEAGUES FROM ASKING
THEM OR SEEING THEM IT CAN DRIVE
A DIFFERENT SET.
IT'S INTERESTING TO UNDERSTAND
MORE OF THOSE DIFFERENT FACETS
WHICH MAKES IT MORE COMPLICATED.
>> I THINK IT WAS REALLY LOVELY
THE WAY THE METHODS TO FIND A
WAY OF STILL BEING ABLE TO FAKE
A QUANTITIVE APPROACH EVEN IN
THE FACE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF
THE VARIABLES YOU WANT TO LOOK
AT.
THERE ARE WAYS WE CAN PUSH
AGAINST THAT AND PROVIDE THE
DATA WE NEED TO MOTIVATE CHANGE.
AND SO ANOTHER QUESTION, IN MY
EXPERIENCE, ONE OF THE BIGGEST
INFLUENCES WHETHER I WILL CITE
IS PAPER IS WHETHER IT'S IN OPEN
ACCESS PUBLICATION OR OTHERWISE
EASILY OBTAINABLE FORM A I RUN
INTO A WALL.
IF YOU LOOKED INTO THE GROUPS
YOU EXAMINED ARE PUBLISHING
WHERE THE VARIOUS GROUPS ARE
EXAM THE PUBLISHING AND HOW IT
FITS WITH YOUR CITATION DATA?
>> THAT'S SUCH A GREAT QUESTION.
WE HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THAT
HOWEVER, WE ARE AWARE THAT OPEN
ACCESS IN MANY JOURNALS REQUIRES
A HEFTY PRICETAG, WHICH MEANS
THERE'S AN ASSOCIATION BETWEEN
THE WEALTH OF THE LAB AND THE
NUMBER OF OPEN ACCESS PAPERS.
AND BECAUSE THERE IS ALSO AN
ASSOCIATION BETWEEN WEALTH OF
THE LAB AND GENDER RACE AND
ETHNICITY, THERE WILL BE A
PREDOMINANCE -- A SKEW IN THE
DEMOGRAPHICS OF AUTHORS OF OPEN
ACCESS PUBLICATIONS ON AVERAGE
SO THAT IS MY KNOWLEDGE OF IT
BUT I DON'T HAVE THE DATA TO
SHOW YOU EXCEPT THAT WOULD BE
MINE.
>> THANK YOU.
ANOTHER QUESTION -- THIS MIGHT
RELATE TO THE NETWORK
PERSPECTIVES THAT YOU ARE
MENTIONING.
HOW MUCH PROFESSIONAL INTERACTS
EFFECT CITING.
THEY CITE OTHER AUTHORS THOUGH
KNOW INTERACT WITH REFLECTING
SOME KIND OF SEGREGATION OR
COLLECTIVE CLUBS?
>> YES, DEFINITELY.
SO, THE WAY THAT WE SEE THIS
THAT'S QUANTIFIABLE IS THAT WE
TEND TO CITE ON OUR
CO-AUTHORSHIP NETWORK, MAY CITE
PEOPLE I CO-AUTHOR WITH BUT I'M
LIKELY TO SITE PEOPLE THAT THEY
CO-AUTHOR WITH.
SO TWO STEPS AWAY FROM ME.
IT'S MUCH LESS LIKELY FOR ME TO
CITE SOMEONE WHO IS SEVEN ORATOR
NINE STEPS AWAY FROM ME ON THE
CO-AUTHORSHIP NETWORK.
WHAT IT MEANS IS A LOT OF OUR
CITATIONS ARE RELATIVELY LOCAL
TO COLLABORATION, WHICH IS A
SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN ADDITION TO
BEING A SCIENTIFIC STRUCTURE SO
THAT'S WHERE THE SOCIAL PART
COMES IN.
>> IT SAYS THANK YOU FOR THE
GREAT TALK AND ANY PROSPERITY TO
PROPOSE AN IMPACT FACTOR LIKE
INDEX REGARDING DIVERSITY IN
JOURNAL PUBLICATION?
ACCEPTANCE OR CITATION?
>> DIVERSITY IMPACT.
I DON'T THINK I'M FOLLOWING THAT
QUESTION.
>> WHETHER IT RELATES TO SCORING
JOURNALS?
>> THAT'S INTERESTING.
THAT'S REALLY INTERESTING.
JUST AS A MARK OF -- YEAH.
I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S A GREAT AND INTERESTING
SUGGESTION.
IT'S NOT ONE I'VE HEARD OF
BEFORE.
I DO KNOW THAT JOURNALS DIFFER
SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE DEGREE TO
WHICH THEIR PAPERS ARE BEING --
ARE -- HAVE REFERENCE LISTS THAT
ARE TRACKING THE FIELD VERSUS
NOT TRACKING THE FIELD.
AND AT LEAST IN PHYSICS, I'LL
GIVE PHYSICS AS AN EXAMPLE.
THE PAPERS THAT ARE THE JOURNALS
THAT HAVE MORE PAPERS FROM WOMEN
IN THEM DO TEND TO DO BETTER ON
AVERAGE IN THEIR GENERAL
CITATION PRACTICES.
SO, IT'S ONE THING TO THINK
ABOUT FOR JOURNALS THAT ARE
INVITATION BASED SO SOME OF THE
NATURE REVIEWS JOURNALS FOR
EXAMPLE ARE INVITATION BASED AND
THE REVIEWS OF MODERN PHYSICS IS
INVITATION BASED.
THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHERS AND SO
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK
MAYBE TO BE AWARE OF IS THAT
THOSE INVITATIONS COULD BE
CONSIDERED FOR WHETHER THEY'RE
BEING DISTRIBUTED IN A WAY THAT
IS EQUITABLE.
>> YOU MADE ME WANT TO HEAR THAT
AND THE EDITORIAL BOARD AND
COULD TRACK SOME OF THESE
METRICS AND LOTS OF THE
MECHANISMS THAT COULD ACCOUNT
FOR THAT, I GUESS.
IT RELATES TO THAT.
DO YOU HAVE HYPOTHESIS ABOUT THE
REASON THE DIFFERENT FIELDS ARE
SHOWING DIFFERENT TIME FRIENDS?
WHY IS NEUROSCIENCE DOING SO
BADLY AND ASTROPHYSICS IS DOING
SO WELL, WELL, RELATIVELY
SPEAKING.
>> I'M SO CURIOUS ABOUT THAT
SEPTEMBER 11th I WISH ASWELL.
I WISH I KNEW.
A POSITIVE THOUGHT ABOUT
NEUROSCIENCES THAT MAYBE THE
FIELD IS GROWING MORE DIVERSE
MORE QUICKLY AND SO IF THAT IS
HAPPENING, AND THE CITATION
PRACTICES ARE LAGGING BEHIND,
THEN IT'S GOING TO MAKE THE GAP
WILL BE WIDENING AND WE JUST
NEED THE CITATIONS TO CATCH UP
WITH THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE
FIELD.
SO THERE'S AN INTERESTING CON
CONSTELLATION OF FACTOR THAT
INCLUDES HOW QUICKLY IT'S
CHANGING THE DEMOGRAPHICS BY WHO
IS BEING HIRED AND WHO IS
CONTINUING ON IN RESEARCH.
>> THANK YOU.
AND PERHAPS A FINAL QUESTION MAY
BE FROM DENNIS.
WE SPOKE A LOT ABOUT THE VALUE
OF QUANTITIVE APPROACHES WHICH
YOUR WORK DEMONSTRATES IT SO
BEAUTIFULLY, CAN YOU SPEAK TO
THE VALUE OF RESEARCH IN
QUALITATIVE DATA OR
COMPLIMENTARY MIX OF THE TWO
WITH THESE SORTS OF QUESTIONS IN
MIND?
>> YEAH, I DEFINITELY THINK THAT
QUALITATIVE WORK IS VERY
IMPORTANT AND I ATTEMPTED TO
ALLUDE TO THAT IF OFF HANDILY IN
TERMS OF ARE WE CITING FEMALE IN
ALPEOPLE INALL THE OTHER WAYS, INVITATIONS
TO SPEAK IN THE SYMPOSIUM OR
TWEET ING THIS PERSON'S WORK OR
ET CETERA.
THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER
QUALITATIVE WAYS.
EVEN THE WAY I PUT THE CITATION
IN, IS IT IN A LONG LIST OF LOTS
OF OTHER CITATIONS, SEE
REFERENCES 1-10.
OR IS IT SO AND SO DID THIS
BEAUTIFUL STUDY AND THAT SHOWED
THIS REALLY IMPORTANT THING SO
THAT'S QUALITATIVE AND IT'S
HARDER TO QUANTIFY AND IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT
ISN'T ABOUT THE NUMBER IT'S A
CULTURE OF SCIENCE THAT WE WANT
TO LIVE IN AND I GUESS I WOULD
ALSO SAY THAT AS I ADMIT TO
BEING A SCIENTIST SO I LIKE THE
DATA AND I LIKE TO SEE THAT
SOMETHING IS QUANTIFIABLE AND SO
I SEE MERIT IN THAT AND I SEE
MERIT IN THE QUANTITY TATE TIVE
APPROACHES BECAUSE THEY CAN SHOW
US SOME FACTORS THAT ARE DRIVING
WHAT IS HAPPENING LIKE THE
CO-AUTHOR SHIP NETWORKS, FOR
EXAMPLE OR THE FACT THAT
CITATION TRENDS AROUND CHANGING
WHEN THE FIELD IS CHANGING THE
DEMOGRAPHICS, RIGHT.
THESE FACTORS HELP US TO SORT OF
WRAP OUR HEAD AROUND WHY AND
WHEN WE SEW I LIKE THAT TOO.
>> I'M GETTING A LOT OF THANK
YOUs COMING THROUGH THE CHAT
SO I'M CHANNEL THE AUDIENCE'S
THANKS.
REALLY FABULOUS TALK.
JUST HIGHLIGHTS THE SPECIAL SORT
OF DANI FLAVOR THAT YOU BRING TO
THE WORK.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH MANY OF IT
WAS JUST THRILLING AND PROFOUND
AND ACTIONABLE.
IT WAS A LOVELY WAY TO START THE
YEAR.
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR COMING
AND LISTENING AND LOOK FORWARD
TO SEEING YOU AT THE NEXT
WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON LECTURE
TALK.
THANK YOU, EVERYONE.