An official website of the United States government
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
Why Sociology Matters to Race and Biosocial Science
Recent developments in genetics and neuroscience have led to increasing interest in biosocial approaches to social life. While today's biosocial paradigms seek to examine more fully the inextricable relationships between the biological and the social, they have also renewed concerns about the scientific study of race. Our review describes the innovative ways sociologists have designed biosocial models to capture embodied impacts of racism, but also analyzes the potential for these models normatively to reinforce existing racial inequities. First, we examine how concepts and measurements of difference in the postgenomic era have affected scientific knowledges and social practices of racial identity. Next, we assess sociological investigations of racial inequality in the biosocial era, including the implications of the biological disciplines’ move to embrace the social. We conclude with a discussion of the growing interest in social algorithms and their potential to embed past racial injustices in their predictions of the future.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1932878
- PAR ID:
- 10330672
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Annual Review of Sociology
- Volume:
- 46
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 0360-0572
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 195 to 214
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Public genomic datasets like the 1000 Genomes project (1KGP), Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP), and the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study are valuable public resources that facilitate scientific advancements in biology and enhance the scientific and economic impact of federally funded research projects. Regrettably, these datasets have often been developed and studied in ways that propagate outdated racialized and typological thinking, leading to fallacious reasoning among some readers that social and health disparities among the so-called races are due in part to innate biological differences between them. We highlight how this framing has set the stage for the racist exploitation of these datasets in two ways: First, we discuss the use of public biomedical datasets in studies that claim support for innate genetic differences in intelligence and other social outcomes between the groups identified as races. We further highlight recent instances of this which involve unauthorized access, use, and dissemination of public datasets. Second, we discuss thememification,use of simple figures meant for quick dissemination among lay audiences, of population genetic data to argue for a biological basis for purported human racial groups. We close with recommendations for scientists, to preempt the exploitation and misuse of their data, and for funding agencies, to better enforce violations of data use agreements.more » « less
-
Although much literature has established the presence of demographic bias in natural language processing (NLP) models, most work relies on curated bias metrics that may not be reflective of real-world applications. At the same time, practitioners are increasingly using algorithmic tools in high-stakes settings, with particular recent interest in NLP. In this work, we focus on one such setting: child protective services (CPS). CPS workers often write copious free-form text notes about families they are working with, and CPS agencies are actively seeking to deploy NLP models to leverage these data. Given well-established racial bias in this setting, we investigate possible ways deployed NLP is liable to increase racial disparities. We specifically examine word statistics within notes and algorithmic fairness in risk prediction, coreference resolution, and named entity recognition (NER). We document consistent algorithmic unfairness in NER models, possible algorithmic unfairness in coreference resolution models, and little evidence of exacerbated racial bias in risk prediction. While there is existing pronounced criticism of risk prediction, our results expose previously undocumented risks of racial bias in realistic information extraction systems, highlighting potential concerns in deploying them, even though they may appear more benign. Our work serves as a rare realistic examination of NLP algorithmic fairness in a potential deployed setting and a timely investigation of a specific risk associated with deploying NLP in CPS settings.more » « less
-
Abstract Serological testing remains a passive component of the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a transmission model, we examine how serological testing could have enabled seropositive individuals to increase their relative levels of social interaction while offsetting transmission risks. We simulate widespread serological testing in New York City, South Florida, and Washington Puget Sound and assume seropositive individuals partially restore their social contacts. Compared to no intervention, our model suggests that widespread serological testing starting in late 2020 would have averted approximately 3300 deaths in New York City, 1400 deaths in South Florida and 11,000 deaths in Washington State by June 2021. In all sites, serological testing blunted subsequent waves of transmission. Findings demonstrate the potential benefit of widespread serological testing, had it been implemented in the pre-vaccine era, and remain relevant now amid the potential for emergence of new variants.more » « less
-
Significance Although practically attractive with high prediction and classification power, complicated learning methods often lack interpretability and reproducibility, limiting their scientific usage. A useful remedy is to select truly important variables contributing to the response of interest. We develop a method for deep learning inference using knockoffs, DeepLINK, to achieve the goal of variable selection with controlled error rate in deep learning models. We show that DeepLINK can also have high power in variable selection with a broad class of model designs. We then apply DeepLINK to three real datasets and produce statistical inference results with both reproducibility and biological meanings, demonstrating its promising usage to a broad range of scientific applications.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054903
