They also ran an online experiment to test for evidence of bias in real time. Roughly 400 participants – all PhD holders – were randomly assigned a scientific paper attributed to either a male or female author.
“What we find is that these participants spend more time reading the abstract when they believe that the paper was written by a man. Specifically, they spend an average of 115 seconds on male authors, versus just 98 seconds on papers nominally authored by women. They also rated male-authored papers as more important and more useful for the development of new inventions. This suggests that the problem is less rooted in access and visibility and more about perception: women’s research seems to be seen as less valuable”
Are we missing something?
Prof. Fernandez-Mateo’s findings point to critical differences in the way that the community of innovators and inventors evaluate men and women’s ideas. And this has serious consequences, she says; not just for female scientists but for innovation in general.
If women’s contributions remain overlooked and undervalued, there is a real risk that breakthrough ideas and important innovations in critical areas will be left on the table – that the future will remain disproportionately influenced by male thinking, and that valuable and impactful ideas will be missed.
“We find evidence that academic credibility and authority remain heavily skewed towards men’s work – an inequality that belies the reality of what women have to offer,” she says.
From Katalin Karikó, whose research laid the groundwork for the COVID-19 vaccines, to Tu Youyou, who discovered artemisinin, a powerful anti-malarial drug that has saved millions of lives, on to Grace Hopper whose legacy continues to shape the digital infrastructure we rely on today, women’s impact can change the course of history, she says. Ensuring that their contribution is met with fair consideration means raising awareness of the gender imbalances that continue to stymie the influence of brilliant female minds.
Innovators, inventors, universities and academic institutions have a duty to interrogate their own beliefs, assumptions and behaviours in the way they assess and respond to scientific work, says Prof. Fernandez-Mateo, and to champion the conversation around gender equity in innovation. At the same time, funding agencies and policymakers could be more purposeful about advancing gender parity in the innovation pipeline, “from lab bench to patent office.”
“The idea that innovation is a level playing field — a self-powering cycle built on meritocracy — is a powerful one. But it is not always true. If we want to build a future that reflects the full range of human insight and creativity, we need to make sure we are not leaving brilliant ideas on the table.”
Further reading: Download the full academic paper
link