Matilda effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Matilda effect is a bias against acknowledging the achievements of women scientists, whose work is often attributed to their male colleagues. This effect was first described by suffragist and abolitionist Matilda Joslyn Gage (1826–98) in her essay, "Woman as Inventor". The term "Matilda effect" was coined in 1993 by science historian Margaret W. Rossiter.[1]

Matilda effect

Rossiter provides several examples of this effect. Trotula (Trota of Salerno), a 12th-century Italian woman physician, wrote books which, after her death, were attributed to male authors. Nineteenth- and twentieth-century cases illustrating the Matilda effect include those of Nettie Stevens,[2] Maria Skłodowska Curie, Lise Meitner, Marietta Blau, Rosalind Franklin, and Jocelyn Bell Burnell.

The Matilda effect is sometimes compared to the Matthew effect, whereby an eminent scientist often gets more credit than a comparatively unknown researcher, even if their work is shared or similar.[citation needed]

Professor Ben Barres (born 1955), a neurobiologist at Stanford University Medical School who transitioned from female to male, has spoken of his scientific achievements having been perceived differently, depending on his sex at the time.[3] This offers one account of biases experienced from different identities, as perceived by one individual.

Research[edit]

From an analysis of more than a thousand research publications from the years 1991-2005, it was shown that male scientists more often cite the publications of male authors than of female authors.[4] In 2012, two female researchers from Radboud University Nijmegen showed that in the Netherlands the sex of professorship candidates influences the evaluation made of them.[5] Similar cases are described in an Italian study [6] corroborated further by a Spanish study.[7] On the other hand, several studies found no difference between citations and impact of publications of male authors and those of female authors.[8][9][10]

Swiss researchers have indicated that mass media ask male scientists more often to contribute on shows than they do their female fellow scientists.[11]

U.S. male scientists still receive more recognition and awards compared with women scientists, despite similar achievements. According to one study, "although overt gender discrimination generally continues to decline in American society," "women continue to be disadvantaged with respect to the receipt of scientific awards and prizes, particularly for research."[12]

Examples[edit]

Examples of women subjected to the Matilda effect:

  • Trotula (Trota of Salerno, 12th century) - Italian physician, author of works which, after her death, were attributed to men authors. Hostility toward women as teachers and healers led to denial of her very existence. At first her work was credited to her husband and son but as information got passed on, monks confused her name for that of a man. She is not mentioned in the "Dictionary of Scientific Biography"[13]
  • Nettie Stevens (1861–1912), discoverer of the XY sex-determination system. Her crucial studies of mealworms revealed for the first time that an organism’s sex is determined by its chromosomes rather than by environmental or other factors. Stevens greatly influenced the scientific community’s transition to this new line of inquiry: chromosomal sex determination.[14] However, Thomas Hunt Morgan, a distinguished geneticist at the time, is generally credited with this discovery.[15] Despite her extensive work in the field of genetics, Stevens’ contributions to Morgan’s work are often disregarded.[16]
  • Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930)- Harvard University discovered that stimuli that were paired with other vivid stimuli would be recalled more easily. She also discovered that duration of exposure led to better recall. These findings, along with her paired-associations method, would later be used by Georg Elias Müller and Edward B. Titchener, without any credit being given to Calkins.
  • Gerty Cori (1896–1957), Nobel-laureate biochemist, worked for years as her husband's assistant, despite having equal qualification as him for a professorial position.
  • Rosalind Franklin (1920–58) - now recognized as a principal contributor to the 1953 discovery of DNA structure. At the time of the discovery by Francis Crick and James Watson, for which the two men received a 1962 Nobel Prize, her work was not properly credited (though Watson described the crucial importance of her contribution, in his 1968 book The Double Helix).
  • Marthe Gautier (born 1925) - now recognized for her important role in the discovery of the chromosomal abnormality that causes Down syndrome, a discovery previously attributed exclusively to Jérôme Lejeune.
  • Marian Diamond (born 1926), working at the University of California, Berkeley, experimentally discovered the phenomenon of brain plasticity, which ran contrary to previous neurological dogma. When her seminal 1964 paper[17] was about to be published, she discovered that the names of her two secondary co-authors, David Krech and Mark Rosenzweig, had been placed before her name (which, additionally, had been placed in parentheses). She protested that she had done the essential work described in the paper, and her name was then put in first place (without parentheses). The incident is described in a 2016 documentary film, My Love Affair with the Brain: The Life and Science of Dr. Marian Diamond.[18]
  • Harriet Zuckerman (born 1937) - as a result of the Matilda effect, Zuckerman was also credited by husband Robert K. Merton as co-author of the concept of the Matthew effect.[19][non sequitur]
  • Programmers of ENIAC (dedicated 1946) - several women made substantial contributions to the project, including Adele Goldstine, Kay McNulty, Betty Jennings, Betty Snyder, Marlyn Wescoff, Fran Bilas and Ruth Lichterman, but histories of ENIAC have typically not addressed these contributions, and have at times focused on hardware accomplishments rather than software accomplishments. More information can be found in Jennifer S. Light's essay, "When Computers Were Women",[20] and in a 2014 documentary on the ENIAC programmers project.

Examples of men scientists favored over women scientists for Nobel Prizes

In the arts[edit]

  • Za ścianą (Next Door): a 1971 Polish TV film directed by Krzysztof Zanussi, starring Maja Komorowska as "Anna" and Zbigniew Zapasiewicz as "Jan". The two apartment-building next-door neighbors both work in academia. Jan is an assistant professor. Anna, who would like to develop a closer acquaintance with him, might have achieved comparable academic rank and thus an easier entree to his affections, had a male colleague not appropriated the credit for her research.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Rossiter Margaret W. (1993), "The Matthew/Matilda Effect in Science", Social Studies of Science, London: Sage Publ., 23: 325–341, doi:10.1177/030631293023002004, ISSN 0306-3127 
  2. ^ Resnick, Brian (2016-07-07). "Nettie Stevens discovered XY sex chromosomes. She didn't get credit because she had two X's". Vox. Retrieved 2016-07-07. 
  3. ^ Shankar Vedantam, (13 July 2006). Male Scientist Writes of Life as Female Scientist: Biologist Who Underwent Sex Change Describes Biases Against Women. Washington Post
  4. ^ Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick; Carroll J. Glynn (2013), "The Matilda Effect—Role Congruity Effects on Scholarly Communication A Citation Analysis of Communication Research and Journal of Communication Articles", Communication Research, Sage Publ., 40 (1): 3–26, doi:10.1177/0093650211418339 
  5. ^ Marieke van den Brink; Yvonne Benschop, "Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs", Organization, 19 (4): 507–524, doi:10.1177/1350508411414293 
  6. ^ Andrea Cerroni; Zenia Simonella, "Ethos and symbolic violence among women of science: An empirical study", Social Science Information, 51 (2): 165–182, doi:10.1177/0539018412437102 
  7. ^ María Luisa Jiménez-Rodrigo1; Emilia Martínez-Morante; María del Mar García-Calvente; Carlos Álvarez-Dardet (2008), "Through gender parity in scientific publications", Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, doi:10.1136/jech.2008.074294 
  8. ^ Peter Hegarty; Zoe Walton, "The Consequences of Predicting Scientific Impact in Psychology Using Journal Impact Factors", Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7 (1): 72–78, doi:10.1177/1745691611429356 
  9. ^ Stephane Baldi, "Normative versus Social Constructivist Processes in the Allocation of Citations: A Network-Analytic Model", American Sociological Review, 63 (6): 829–846, doi:10.2307/2657504, JSTOR 2657504 
  10. ^ Nick Haslam; Lauren Ban; Leah Kaufmann; Stephen Loughnan; Kim Peters; Jennifer Whelan; Sam Wilson, "What makes an article influential? Predicting impact in social and personality psychology", Scientometrics, 76 (1): 169–185, doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1892-8 
  11. ^ Fabienne Crettaz von Roten (2011), "Gender Differences in Scientists' Public Outreach and Engagement Activities", Science Communication, 33 (1): 52–75, doi:10.1177/1075547010378658 
  12. ^ Anne E. Lincoln; Stephanie Pincus; Janet Bandows Koster; Phoebe S. Leboy (2012), "The Matilda Effect in science: Awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and 2000s", Social Studies of Science, 42 (2): 307–320, doi:10.1177/0306312711435830 
  13. ^ Rossiter, Margaret W. (1993). ""The Matthew Matilda Effect in Science."". Social Studies of Science. 23 (2): 325–341. JSTOR 285482. 
  14. ^ Hagen, Joel (1996). Doing Biology. Glenview, IL: Harper Collins. pp. 37–46. 
  15. ^ a b c "6 Women Scientists Who Were Snubbed Due to Sexism". Retrieved 2015-10-04. 
  16. ^ "Nettie Maria Stevens (1861-1912) | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia". embryo.asu.edu. Retrieved 2015-10-04. 
  17. ^ Diamond MC, Krech D, Rosenzweig MR,"The Effects of an Enriched Environment on the Histology of the Rat Cerebral Cortex","J Comp Neurol 1964;123:111-120", retrieved 9 February 2017
  18. ^ My Love Affair with the Brain: The Life and Science of Dr. Marian Diamond
  19. ^ http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/merton/matthewii.pdf
  20. ^ Light, Jennifer S. (1999). "When Computers Were Women" (PDF). Technology and Culture. 40 (3): 455–483. 
  21. ^ "ScienceWeek". 2013-04-14. Archived from the original on April 14, 2013. Retrieved 2015-10-10. 
  22. ^ http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/65/10/10.1063/PT.3.1728
  23. ^ http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2004/jan/20/wolf-prize-goes-to-particle-theorists
  24. ^ "CensorshipIndex". www.esthermlederberg.com. Retrieved 2015-10-10. 
  25. ^ "Esther Lederberg, pioneer in genetics, dies at 83". Stanford University. Retrieved 2015-10-10.