Differential social network effects on scholarly productivity: An intersectional analysis
Academic productivity is realized through resources obtained from professional networks in which scientists are embedded. Using a national survey of academic faculty in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields across multiple institution types, we examine how the structure of professional networks affects scholarly productivity and how those effects may differ by race, ethnicity, and gender. We find that network size masks important differences in composition. Using negative binomial regression, we find that both the size and composition of professional networks affect scientific productivity, but bigger is not always better. We find that instrumental networks increase scholarly productivity, while advice networks reduce it. There are important interactive effects that are masked by modeling only direct effects. We find that white men are especially advantaged by instrumental networks, and women are especially advantaged by advice networks.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1661206
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10144897
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Science technology human values
- Volume:
- 43
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 1552-8251
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 570-599
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract Inclusion in the workplace is defined as the extent to which individuals perceive that they are part of significant processes in organizations. This article explores the determinants of workplace inclusion by asking: How does the demographic composition of social networks inside and outside of the workplace affect perceived inclusion in the workplace? We apply literature on social identity theory and social network theory to develop and test hypotheses on professional sub‐network demographic composition using the linear regression analysis on data from the 2011 National Science Foundation–funded national survey of academic faculty on work environment and careers in US universities. Among other results, we find that perceived inclusion is explained by the interactions between race, gender, and demographic composition of professional networks. Findings provide new insights for the management of diversity in the workplace. -
The COVID-19 pandemic impacted personal and professional life. For academics, research, teaching, and service tasks were upended and we all had to navigate the altered landscape. However, some individuals faced a disproportionate burden, particularly academics with minoritized identities or those who were early career, were caregivers, or had intersecting identities. As comparative endocrinologists, we determine how aspects of indi- vidual and species-level variation influence response to, recovery from, and resilience in the face of stressors. Here, we flip that framework and apply an integrative biological lens to the impact of the COVID-19 chronic stressor on our endocrine community. We address how the pandemic altered impact factors of academia (e.g., scholarly products) and relatedly, how factors of impact (e.g., sex, gender, race, career stage, caregiver status, etc.) altered the way in which individuals could respond. We predict the pandemic will have long-term impacts on the population dynamics, composition, and landscape of our academic ecosystem. Impact factors of research, namely journal submissions, were altered by COVID-19, and women authors saw a big dip. We discuss this broadly and then report General and Comparative Endocrinology (GCE) manuscript submission and acceptance status by gender and geographic region from 2019 to 2023. We also summarize how the pandemic impacted individuals with different axes of identity, how academic institutions have responded, compile proposed solu- tions, and conclude with a discussion on what we can all do to (re)build the academy in an equitable way. At GCE, the first author positions had gender parity, but men outnumbered women at the corresponding author position. Region of manuscript origin mattered for submission and acceptance rates, and women authors from Asia and the Middle East were the most heavily impacted by the pandemic. The number of manuscripts sub- mitted dropped after year 1 of the pandemic and has not yet recovered. Thus, COVID-19 was a chronic stressor for the GCE community.more » « less
-
The LINK scholarship program at the University of South Alabama is funded by an NSF S-STEM grant, awarding scholarships to low-income students transferring from community colleges in the Gulf Coast region to complete degrees in chemical, civil, computer, electrical, or mechanical engineering. The program provides financial support and academic mentoring to foster student success and optimize time to degree completion after transfer. Part of that effort includes providing pre-transfer advice through interactions with faculty and advisors at the regional community colleges. A further objective is to promote transfer student integration into the college, as this is expected to enhance academic achievement and professional development. This engagement is encouraged through faculty mentorship with frequent meetings, a cohort-building academic success seminar, and expected participation in engineering-focused student organizations. Our project includes a mixed-methods study to improve our understanding of what support mechanisms effectively integrate transfer students in our college, and how students perceive that integration to enhance their academic and professional development. Early data analysis is presented here. Student surveys indicate that they believe that peers in their classes and their assigned faculty advisors have the greatest impact on their integration and academic success. For professional development, the transfer students find that internships the most importance, followed by participation in student organizations.more » « less
-
With teams growing in all areas of scientific and scholarly research, we explore the relationship between team structure and the character of knowledge they produce. Drawing on 89,575 self-reports of team member research activity underlying scientific publications, we show how individual activities cohere into broad roles of 1) leadership through the direction and presentation of research and 2) support through data collection, analysis, and discussion. The hidden hierarchy of a scientific team is characterized by its lead (or L) ratio of members playing leadership roles to total team size. The L ratio is validated through correlation with imputed contributions to the specific paper and to science as a whole, which we use to effectively extrapolate the L ratio for 16,397,750 papers where roles are not explicit. We find that, relative to flat, egalitarian teams, tall, hierarchical teams produce less novelty and more often develop existing ideas, increase productivity for those on top and decrease it for those beneath, and increase short-term citations but decrease long-term influence. These effects hold within person—the same person on the same-sized team produces science much more likely to disruptively innovate if they work on a flat, high-L-ratio team. These results suggest the critical role flat teams play for sustainable scientific advance and the training and advancement of scientists.more » « less
-
more » « less
Purpose: The increasing complexity of principals’ roles, including focusing both on learning outcomes and equity issues, requires having the flexibility to view novel problems through multiple lenses. In this article, we draw on institutional theory and social network research to understand the factors enabling and constraining the cognitive repertoire principals draw on when solving problems. Methods: The data come from a field simulation of how 52 principals respond to and seek advice for two problem scenarios. Along with principals’ personal and school characteristics, we examine how the characteristics of principals’ professional networks are related to their problem-solving and reliance on institutional logics. Findings: Some imprecision in the model estimates notwithstanding, in this exploratory study intended to illuminate potential patterns for study in future research. We find evidence that principals draw on four institutional logics when solving problems: democratic and family logics, bureaucratic logics, professional logics, and market logics. Principals’ reliance on these institutional logics appears to be related to the closeness of the colleagues in their advice networks as well as the nature of the problem they are solving. Implications: One key contribution is to research is to reveal the subtlety of the social sensemaking involved in interpreting and taking action in institutional environments. The results also highlight which network characteristics might help principals respond more flexibly to new and complex problems in institutional contexts, such as racial equity.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
