IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0160015.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Not “Pulling up the Ladder”: Women Who Organize Conference Symposia Provide Greater Opportunities for Women to Speak at Conservation Conferences

Author

Listed:
  • Stephanie Sardelis
  • Joshua A Drew

Abstract

The scientific community faces numerous challenges in achieving gender equality among its participants. One method of highlighting the contributions made by female scientists is through their selection as featured speakers in symposia held at the conferences of professional societies. Because they are specially invited, symposia speakers obtain a prestigious platform from which to display their scientific research, which can elevate the recognition of female scientists. We investigated the number of female symposium speakers in two professional societies (the Society of Conservation Biology (SCB) from 1999 to 2015, and the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH) from 2005 to 2015), in relation to the number of female symposium organizers. Overall, we found that 36.4% of symposia organizers and 31.7% of symposia speakers were women at the Society of Conservation Biology conferences, while 19.1% of organizers and 28% of speakers were women at the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists conferences. For each additional female organizer at the SCB and ASIH conferences, there was an average increase of 95% and 70% female speakers, respectively. As such, we found a significant positive relationship between the number of women organizing a symposium and the number of women speaking in that symposium. We did not, however, find a significant increase in the number of women speakers or organizers per symposium over time at either conference, suggesting a need for revitalized efforts to diversify our scientific societies. To further those ends, we suggest facilitating gender equality in professional societies by removing barriers to participation, including assisting with travel, making conferences child-friendly, and developing thorough, mandatory Codes of Conduct for all conferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephanie Sardelis & Joshua A Drew, 2016. "Not “Pulling up the Ladder”: Women Who Organize Conference Symposia Provide Greater Opportunities for Women to Speak at Conservation Conferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0160015
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160015
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160015&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0160015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynne A Isbell & Truman P Young & Alexander H Harcourt, 2012. "Stag Parties Linger: Continued Gender Bias in a Female-Rich Scientific Discipline," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-4, November.
    2. Daniel Conley & Johanna Stadmark, 2012. "A call to commission more women writers," Nature, Nature, vol. 488(7413), pages 590-590, August.
    3. Jevin D West & Jennifer Jacquet & Molly M King & Shelley J Correll & Carl T Bergstrom, 2013. "The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-6, July.
    4. Elsa Addessi & Marta Borgi & Elisabetta Palagi, 2012. "Is Primatology an Equal-Opportunity Discipline?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(1), pages 1-6, January.
    5. Jennifer L Martin, 2014. "Ten Simple Rules to Achieve Conference Speaker Gender Balance," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-3, November.
    6. Karpowitz, Christopher F. & Mendelberg, Tali & Shaker, Lee, 2012. "Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 533-547, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luke Holman & Devi Stuart-Fox & Cindy E Hauser, 2018. "The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-20, April.
    2. Chaojiang Wu & Erjia Yan & Yongjun Zhu & Kai Li, 2021. "Gender imbalance in the productivity of funded projects: A study of the outputs of National Institutes of Health R01 grants," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(11), pages 1386-1399, November.
    3. Marco Pautasso, 2015. "The Italian University Habilitation and the Challenge of Increasing the Representation of Women in Academia," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Ann-Maree Vallence & Mark R Hinder & Hakuei Fujiyama, 2019. "Data-driven selection of conference speakers based on scientific impact to achieve gender parity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, July.
    5. Liu, Meijun & Zhang, Ning & Hu, Xiao & Jaiswal, Ajay & Xu, Jian & Chen, Hong & Ding, Ying & Bu, Yi, 2022. "Further divided gender gaps in research productivity and collaboration during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from coronavirus-related literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    6. Magdalena Formanowicz & Marta Witkowska & Weronika Hryniszak & Zuzanna Jakubik & Aleksandra Cisłak, 2023. "Gender bias in special issues: evidence from a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2283-2299, April.
    7. Shannon Tushingham & Tiffany Fulkerson & Katheryn Hill, 2017. "The peer review gap: A longitudinal case study of gendered publishing and occupational patterns in a female-rich discipline, Western North America (1974–2016)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, November.
    8. Luke Holman & Claire Morandin, 2019. "Researchers collaborate with same-gendered colleagues more often than expected across the life sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Ho Fai Chan & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Gender differences in performance of top cited scientists by field and country," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2421-2447, December.
    10. Alecia J Carter & Alyssa Croft & Dieter Lukas & Gillian M Sandstrom, 2018. "Women’s visibility in academic seminars: Women ask fewer questions than men," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, September.
    11. David Downie & Austin Chinal & Ryan Fritz & Natalie Intemann & Kayla Urbanowski, 2018. "The first 6 years of JESS: categorizing authors and topics," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 371-375, September.
    12. Lin Zhang & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Gender differences among active reviewers: an investigation based on publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 145-179, January.
    13. O’Brien, Diana Z. & Rickne, Johanna, 2016. "Gender Quotas and Women's Political Leadership," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(1), pages 112-126, February.
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/65v9ag2jfn865abjgaljmq2qi9 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Kwiek, Marek & Szymula, Łukasz, 2024. "Growth of Science and Women: Methodological Challenges of Using Structured Big Data," SocArXiv w34pr, Center for Open Science.
    16. Thelwall, Mike & Bailey, Carol & Makita, Meiko & Sud, Pardeep & Madalli, Devika P., 2019. "Gender and research publishing in India: Uniformly high inequality?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 118-131.
    17. Josh Yamamoto & Eitan Frachtenberg, 2022. "Gender Differences in Collaboration Patterns in Computer Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, February.
    18. Birgit Mellis & Patricia Soto & Chrystal D Bruce & Graciela Lacueva & Anne M Wilson & Rasitha Jayasekare, 2018. "Factors affecting the number and type of student research products for chemistry and physics students at primarily undergraduate institutions: A case study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, April.
    19. Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2024. "Gender bias in team formation: the case of the European Science Foundation’s grants," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 247-260.
    20. Lynne A Isbell & Truman P Young & Alexander H Harcourt, 2012. "Stag Parties Linger: Continued Gender Bias in a Female-Rich Scientific Discipline," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-4, November.
    21. Amy Hinsley & William J Sutherland & Alison Johnston, 2017. "Men ask more questions than women at a scientific conference," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0160015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.