iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Nick LaBerge

Dan Larremore @danlarremore.bsky.social · 25/08/2026

🎉 New paper (and data) on editorial & peer review at Science and Science Advances, two elite general science journals. With a wonderful team! @samzhang.bsky.social, @nicklaberge.bsky.social, Quinten and @aaronclauset.bsky.social. 1/ www.science.org/doi/full/10....

Screenshot of the title page:

Elite general science journals shape scientific discourse, public policy, and scientific careers. However, expectations of confidentiality in most editorial proceedings has limited efforts to understand and improve the review process. Here, we describe and release deidentified data on 110,303 manuscript submissions over 5 years at Science and Science Advances, two elite general science journals. Analyzing evaluation dynamics across the initial editorial review and subsequent peer review stages, we find strong selective effects associated with higher institutional prestige, larger team size, and certain topics and countries. Corresponding authors who are men exhibit a small but significant advantage at Science, while authors based in China have a significant disadvantage. These associations are generally stronger in editorial review than in peer review, even as final editorial decisions correlate strongly with reviewer advice. These patterns highlight the complexity of multistage evaluations at elite journals and the importance of open data to better understand them.

39439

Reposted by Nick LaBerge

Dan Larremore @danlarremore.bsky.social · 13/09/2024

Academics! Where do you prefer or hope to publish? Have a few minute to tell us? My group at CU Boulder is surveying the publication preferences of academics in a pairwise comparison survey called Publish or Comparish. → tinyurl.com/PubPrefs Thanks for considering & pls share with colleagues!

33034

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

13/ To sum up: - Hiring has had a greater impact on women's representation (2011-2020) - Hiring is projected to be more impactful for future parity - Yet women are more likely to leave faculty jobs at every career stage, limiting trends to parity Read the article for all of the details!

elifesciences.org

Gendered hiring and attrition on the path to parity for academic faculty

Achieving gender parity among U.S. tenured and tenure-track faculty will require changes to hiring, which has substantially greater impacts on faculty gender representation than gendered differences i...

094

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

12/ Another important limitation is that our study considers only faculty gender. Including other key variables like race and socioeconomic status will likely be crucial for comprehensive understanding of hiring and attrition dynamics, and impacts.

142

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

11/ One important limitation is that this work treats all attritions equally. Ex: retirements are treated the same as pulls to industry. But reasons for leaving have been shown to correlate with gender (pushes vs. pulls, see work by @kspoon.bsky.social, bsky.app/profile/kspo...)

141

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

10/ Expanding projections across academic domains, we find: 🚀 Substantial changes to hiring are needed to boost repr. in most fields 👴🏻 Waiting for retirement-driven turnover won't fix gender disparity 🏁 Many fields won’t reach parity if gendered differences in attrition persist

132

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

9/ In the Natural Sciences, we project that hiring more women would boost overall representation of women the most, while addressing attrition disparities in isolation would lead to smaller increases in representation.

141

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

8/ We model faculty hiring and attrition by setting attrition risks (gendered or neutral) and the fraction of women among hires (maintained or increased). Here's an example of projections for the Natural Sciences from 2020 onward for 5 scenarios:

130

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

7/ How much will the gender representation gap shrink in the next 40 years: - when the older generations of faculty retire? - if gendered differences in attrition are eliminated? - or if more women are hired as faculty?

130

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

6/ In other words, all-cause attrition is a mixed bag: Early and mid-career attrition differences cause a disproportionate loss of women faculty, even as late-career retirements of disproportionately men cause women’s representation to increase overall.

131

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

5/ All-cause attrition combines: (i) pre-retirement attrition and (ii) retirements. We show that pre-retirement attrition is gendered–women are more likely to leave faculty jobs than men at every career stage. Yet all-cause attrition increases women's representation due to retirements.

120

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

4/ Analyzing faculty records (N=1,768,118 person-years) across 111 fields, 2011-2020, we find: 🔍 Hiring increased women’s representation in 95% of fields 🔍 Attrition (including retirements) increased women’s repr. in 74% of fields 🚀Hiring was the main driver in 87% of fields.

130

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

3/ Faculty gender diversity changes via 2 processes: hiring & attrition. How important has each process been? The answer matters—interventions differ!—yet can't be learned from representation stats alone. Here, we use high-res data to separate & quantify the 2 effects over 10 yrs.

140

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

2/ Even though women 🎓 have received more than 50% of BAs since 1981 and 👩‍🎓 earned 46% of U.S. PhDs in 2021 (🔬38% in STEM, 📚59% in non-STEM) 👩‍🏫 women comprise _only 36%_ of tenure-track faculty

1104

Nick LaBerge @nicklaberge.bsky.social · 19/07/2024

1/ I’m excited to share our article "Gendered hiring and attrition on the path to parity for academic faculty" with Hunter Wapman @aaronclauset.bsky.social @danlarremore.bsky.social , now published @elife.bsky.social : elifesciences.org/articles/93755

12817