skip to main content


Title: The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science
Prior work finds a diversity paradox: Diversity breeds innovation, yet underrepresented groups that diversify organizations have less successful careers within them. Does the diversity paradox hold for scientists as well? We study this by utilizing a near-complete population of ∼1.2 million US doctoral recipients from 1977 to 2015 and following their careers into publishing and faculty positions. We use text analysis and machine learning to answer a series of questions: How do we detect scientific innovations? Are underrepresented groups more likely to generate scientific innovations? And are the innovations of underrepresented groups adopted and rewarded? Our analyses show that underrepresented groups produce higher rates of scientific novelty. However, their novel contributions are devalued and discounted: For example, novel contributions by gender and racial minorities are taken up by other scholars at lower rates than novel contributions by gender and racial majorities, and equally impactful contributions of gender and racial minorities are less likely to result in successful scientific careers than for majority groups. These results suggest there may be unwarranted reproduction of stratification in academic careers that discounts diversity’s role in innovation and partly explains the underrepresentation of some groups in academia.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1827477
NSF-PAR ID:
10167101
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Volume:
117
Issue:
17
ISSN:
0027-8424
Page Range / eLocation ID:
9284 to 9291
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Innovation is one of the most important drivers of economic growth, yet only 8% of minorities,12% of women, and < 0.05% of African Americans are recognized as innovators. However, acomprehensive analysis of nearly all doctoral dissertations from 1977 to 2015 shows that although individuals from under-represented minority groups demonstrated greater scientific innovation, their contributions are rarely further adopted compared to equally impactful contributions by majority groups. In this instance “rarely further adopted,” as noted by Hofstra et al. (1), means that the “novel contributions by gender and racial minorities are taken up by other scholars at lower rates than novel contributions by gender and racial majorities, and equally impactful contributions of gender and racial minorities are less likely to result in successful scientific careers than for majority groups.” Access to the wealth of potential innovations — going largely unnoticed and underutilized — from under-represented minority groups can be achieved, in part, by engaging science and engineering students, faculty, and staff at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) in entrepreneurship through the use of the Innovation Corps (I-Corps) curriculum with adaptations to fit the education and research environments at HBCUs. A consortium of three North Carolina universities and the NYC Regional InnovationNetwork (NYCRIN) I-Corps Node established a partnership developing a specialized Lean LaunchPad training program for HBCU students, faculty, and staff. Implementation followeda three-step train-the-trainers ‘mentor-protege’ model, where new instructors ‘see one, do one, be one’ while learning to deliver the curriculum. The overarching goals of this initiativeare to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach in broadening participation in I-Corps and mainstreaming the innovation capacities of HBCUs. The authors include instructors from the collaborating institutions, who trained and served as the teaching team for regional and national cohorts. Included are the rationale for creating the program, partnership selection,instructor and team recruitment, best practices for the ‘mentor-protege’ model, and outcomes for the cohorts. This contribution is a unique opportunity for other faculty to learn from practitioners about the challenges and successes involved in creating such a new multi-institutional entrepreneurship training paradigm. 
    more » « less
  2. Amaral, Luís_A Nunes (Ed.)
    Despite the importance of a diversity of backgrounds and perspectives in biological research, women, racial and ethnic minorities, and students from non-traditional academic backgrounds remain underrepresented in the composition of university faculty. Through a study on doctoral students at a research-intensive university, we pinpoint advising from faculty as a critical component of graduate student experiences and productivity. Graduate students from minority backgrounds reported lower levels of support from their advisors and research groups. However, working with an advisor from a similar demographic background substantially improved productivity and well-being of these students. Several other aspects of mentoring practices positively predicted student success and belonging, including frequent one-on-one meetings, empathetic and constructive feedback, and relationships with other peer or faculty mentors. Our study highlights the need to renovate graduate education with a focus on retention–not just recruitment–to best prepare students for success in scientific careers. 
    more » « less
  3. Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine how doctoral students in the biological sciences understand their research skill development and explore potential racial/ethnic and gender inequalities in the scientific learning process. Design/methodology/approach Based on interviews with 87 doctoral students in the biological sciences, this study explores how doctoral students describe development of their research skills. More specifically, a constructivist grounded theory approach is employed to understand how doctoral students make meaning of their research skill development process and how that may vary by gender and race/ethnicity. Findings The findings reveal two emergent groups, “technicians” who focus on discrete tasks and data collection, and “interpreters” who combine technical expertise with attention to the larger scientific field. Although both groups are developing important skills, “interpreters” have a broader range of skills that support successful scholarly careers in science. Notably, white men are overrepresented among the “interpreters,” whereas white women and students from minoritized racial/ethnic groups are concentrated among the “technicians.” Originality/value While prior literature provides valuable insights into the inequalities across various aspects of doctoral socialization, scholars have rarely attended to examining inequalities in research skill development. This study provides new insights into the process of scientific learning in graduate school. Findings reveal that research skill development is not a uniform experience, and that doctoral education fosters different kinds of learning that vary by gender and race/ethnicity. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract There is a well-documented gap between the observed number of works produced by women and by men in science, with clear consequences for the retention and promotion of women 1 . The gap might be a result of productivity differences 2–5 , or it might be owing to women’s contributions not being acknowledged 6,7 . Here we find that at least part of this gap is the result of unacknowledged contributions: women in research teams are significantly less likely than men to be credited with authorship. The findings are consistent across three very different sources of data. Analysis of the first source—large-scale administrative data on research teams, team scientific output and attribution of credit—show that women are significantly less likely to be named on a given article or patent produced by their team relative to their male peers. The gender gap in attribution is present across most scientific fields and almost all career stages. The second source—an extensive survey of authors—similarly shows that women’s scientific contributions are systematically less likely to be recognized. The third source—qualitative responses—suggests that the reason that women are less likely to be credited is because their work is often not known, is not appreciated or is ignored. At least some of the observed gender gap in scientific output may be owing not to differences in scientific contribution, but rather to differences in attribution. 
    more » « less
  5. Abstract

    The success of mentoring derives from active and respectful listening and the willingness to learn and accept opportunities for personal growth. This shapes every trainee and their destined path in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The act of cultivating rapport, asking, and pondering meaningful questions, and receiving constructive feedback are critical to support a productive mentoring relationship. Successful mentoring in STEM can be established and allow mentees, especially underrepresented minorities (URMs), to flourish in an environment where they feel welcomed and supported. However, mentees from underrepresented groups often experience inadequate mentoring due to a mentor's lack of awareness, poor trainings themselves, or lack of understanding of the mentee’s hardships. It is important for mentors and mentees to work together to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in STEM education through creativity, authenticity, and networking. We analyzed data obtained from students who attended a recent workshop that are interested in going to graduate school. Our results show that despite low initial expectations for the workshop, many students were satisfied in the knowledge they gleaned. The future and role of diversity in STEM within these underrepresented groups lies in community support and an important role that they can play in the lives of others through DEI initiatives and throughout their careers all of which involves positive mentoring.

     
    more » « less