Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesEcologyPeer-reviewed journal article
Perceived and observed biases within scientific communities: a case study in movement ecology
Allison K. ShawiD, Leila FoudaiD, Stefano MezziniiD, Dongmin KimiD, Nilanjan ChatterjeeiD, David W. WolfsoniD, Briana L. AbrahmsiD, Nina AttiasiD, Christine E. BeardsworthiD, Roxanne S. BeltraniD, Sandra A. BinningiD, Kayla M. BlincowiD, Ying‐Chi ChaniD, Emanuel A. FronhoferiD, Arne HegemanniD, Edward R. HurmeiD, Fabiola IannarilliiD, Julie B. KellneriD, Karen D. McCoyiD, Kasim RafiqiD, Marjo SaastamoineniD, Ana M. M. SequeiraiD, Mitchell W. SerotaiD, Petra SumasgutneriD, Yun TaoiD, , Francesca CagnacciiD
Abstract
Who conducts biological research, where, and how the results are disseminated varies among geographies and identities. Identifying and documenting these forms of bias by research communities is a critical first step towards addressing them. We documented perceived and observed biases in movement ecology. Movement ecology is a rapidly expanding sub-discipline of biology, which is strongly underpinned by fieldwork and technology use. First, we surveyed attendees of an international conference, and discussed the results at the conference (comparing uninformed vs informed perceived bias). Although most researchers identified as bias-aware, only a subset of biases were discussed in conversation. Next, by considering author affiliations from publications in the journal Movement Ecology, we found among-country discrepancies between the country of the authors affiliation and study site location related to national economics. At the within-country scale, we found that race-gender identities of postgraduate biology researchers in the USA differed from national demographics. We discuss the role of potential specific causes for the emergence of bias in the sub-discipline, e.g. parachute-science or accessibility to fieldwork. Undertaking data-driven analysis of bias within research sub-disciplines can help identify specific barriers and first steps towards the inclusion of a greater diversity of participants in the scientific process.
- Citations
- 5
- FWCI
- 5.70
- Field percentile
- top 4%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Drab and distant birds are studied less than their fancy-feathered friends
S. E. Fischer, A. M. Lindsay, … H. M. Streby·bioRxiv·Oct 26, 2023
- Gender-biased perceptions of important ecology articles
C. J. A. Bradshaw, F. Courchamp·Rethinking EcologyPeer-reviewed·Apr 11, 2018
- Data Gap or Biodiversity Gap? Evaluating apparent spatial biases in community science observations of Odonata in the east-central United States.
C. M. Bullion, C. A. Bahlai·bioRxiv·Nov 29, 2022
- A persistent lack of International representation on editorial boards in environmental biology
J. Espin, S. Palmas-Perez, … E. Bruna·bioRxiv·Sep 22, 2017
- A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities
R. A. Marks, E. J. Amezquita, … R. VanBuren·bioRxiv·Oct 15, 2022
- Analysis of science journalism reveals gender and regional disparities in coverage
N. R. Davidson, C. S. Greene·bioRxiv·Jun 21, 2021