really quiet upsetting! @NatureComms
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
Shout out to wonderful mentors like @waterbarnes for doing important research on representation in STEM!
RT @DasLab_Pombe: This is infuriating for so many reasons. It pains me to think that @NatureComms readers all over the world will read this…
Sigh! If I didn't have a group of amazing women mentors, I would not even stay long enough in academia. Yes, I do have men mentors too, but that's besides the point.
RT @caoresco: Really @NatureComms???? Really?????
RT @ctmurphy1: I think the *real* thing these data suggest needs to be addressed is publishing women's work fairly. My lab & pubs are typic…
RT @GreeneScientist: TFW you find evidence of sexism in science ( https://t.co/NVVN4bkjxq ) and instead of having your takeaway be "wow, we…
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
I’m still digesting this paper. The main thing that strikes me so far is that it seems to presume that mentoring means co-authorship. This is not what mentoring is about! Many/most of my mentees and mentors are not my collaborators or co-authors.
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @GreeneScientist: TFW you find evidence of sexism in science ( https://t.co/NVVN4bkjxq ) and instead of having your takeaway be "wow, we…
RT @StHilaireLab: Can you comment on the bullshit that is this study @NatureComms? "female protégés who remain in academia reap more bene…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
This is the journalistic equivalent of a click-bait paper. There is a reason that many refer to the Nature cluster of journals as "tabloids". Editorial decisions are frequently made on the basis of perceived readership rather than perceived veracity.
RT @waterbarnes: Sigh. Where to begin? In our longitudinal study we showed that w each additional same gender mentor students had 2x great…
RT @JacquelynGill: This is super shoddy science, and harmful conclusions. It was somehow published despite reviewers raising these very iss…
RT @StHilaireLab: Can you comment on the bullshit that is this study @NatureComms? "female protégés who remain in academia reap more bene…
I can' even put into words what I am feeling after reading this... #WomenInSTEM
There’s a lot to say here but I’ll point out that two of my postdoc supervisors were women @ClaudiaRatti and Frederique Grassi. That’s not even counting the MANY other women who have advised me over the years but weren’t writing my paychecks. I would not b
RT @KBoerder: @NatureComms This is embarrassing and bad, did noone review this (maybe just men)? Did noone stop and think if this should be…
RT @GreeneScientist: TFW you find evidence of sexism in science ( https://t.co/NVVN4bkjxq ) and instead of having your takeaway be "wow, we…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
@NatureComms This is embarrassing and bad, did noone review this (maybe just men)? Did noone stop and think if this should be published? The basis for this 'work' has more holes than a Swiss Cheese and only serves to further cater to patriarchal structures
The authors almost seem to suggest that staying away from women mentors might be the way forward if you want an impactful career as a woman scientist! Complete NONSENSE! https://t.co/StYKIOjH3V
RT @waterbarnes: Sigh. Where to begin? In our longitudinal study we showed that w each additional same gender mentor students had 2x great…
RT @ArielKahrl: The authors were soooo close, then missed the mark entirely. https://t.co/hVL4adbXrN
RT @DrDorotaSK: Unbelievable.... #womeninscience #WomenInSTEM #womeninacademia this is how the interpretation is killing the actual data. @…
Ah, I see @NatureComms learned nothing from the downfall of @angew_chem for publishing trash. But then again, I’m not sure @angew_chem learned anything so 🤷♀️
Unbelievable.... #womeninscience #WomenInSTEM #womeninacademia this is how the interpretation is killing the actual data. @NatureComms - please retract this article. Who was the editor of this piece? Make sure you know @NatureNews
Wildly irresponsible of Nature to give a platform to such damaging policy recommendations 😤
RT @FlyBehaviour: Finding: Female-female mentoring relationships result in lower publication outcomes. Author interpretation: Female-femal…
Really @NatureComms???? Really?????
RT @JacquelynGill: This is super shoddy science, and harmful conclusions. It was somehow published despite reviewers raising these very iss…
RT @GreeneScientist: TFW you find evidence of sexism in science ( https://t.co/NVVN4bkjxq ) and instead of having your takeaway be "wow, we…
I did want to be burning with anger over a paper today and this one has smashed it out of the park. What the actual fuck.
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
Exactly this.
I just... I just can't. #speechless #academia #STEM
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
This 👇
RT @LuciaScience: how could something like that get published @NatureComms ? https://t.co/mc5gZ0KM4n https://t.co/5wpZCGlt3N
I was discussing the conclusions of this paper (women should train w/ men) with my labmate Rose: they miss the point entirely! We agreed that training with excellent women PIs was critical for knowing how to cope with and navigate biases. https://t.co/KGIb
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
👇🏼👇🏼👇🏼👇🏼
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
RT @JacquelynGill: This is super shoddy science, and harmful conclusions. It was somehow published despite reviewers raising these very iss…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
damn @NatureComms really dropped that?... with just a single line pointing to male privilege as a 'potential explanation'?... sad results to see, even sadder framing of the study https://t.co/zsUjFGT4Uz
RT @WISESTualberta: A great thread on dissecting a very controversial paper indicating female to female mentorship may hinder the careers o…
Good thread on some of the (many) problems with the recent @naturecomms paper on women mentors in science. The conclusion that increasing the proportion of female mentors is somehow HARMFUL to trainees is so insanely backwards I don't even know what to sa
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @burginam: Lots of commentary on this, rightly so. I'll just add that BS like this is what we get when we define "success" too narrowl…
RT @ctmurphy1: I think the *real* thing these data suggest needs to be addressed is publishing women's work fairly. My lab & pubs are typic…
A great thread on dissecting a very controversial paper indicating female to female mentorship may hinder the careers of women in academia. What are your takes on this paper?
how could something like that get published @NatureComms ? https://t.co/5wpZCGlt3N
RT @cefry42: Read this whole thread about a paper in @NatureComms But tl;dr biased metrics produced biased results https://t.co/lhHKrmtNX1
RT @its_RWright: As reviewers commented, co-authorship!=mentorship and framing the protégé–mentor relationship as a 1-to-1 exchange is prob…
RT @FlyBehaviour: Finding: Female-female mentoring relationships result in lower publication outcomes. Author interpretation: Female-femal…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @MarchForScience: Concluding that "women are bad mentors for women" is a horrific take. WTF @NatureComms? https://t.co/7Wf0F6V1Da
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
exactly. can we start looking at removing the biases present in the academic system (and all the systems) rather than blaming those which the biases are known to work against.
RT @FlyBehaviour: Finding: Female-female mentoring relationships result in lower publication outcomes. Author interpretation: Female-femal…
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
WE MUST NOT LET THE WOMEN HELP EACH OTHER!!! (Seriously tho - that's the paper...)
RT @DasLab_Pombe: This is infuriating for so many reasons. It pains me to think that @NatureComms readers all over the world will read this…
RT @ctmurphy1: I think the *real* thing these data suggest needs to be addressed is publishing women's work fairly. My lab & pubs are typic…
RT @stephaniehicks: I'm absolutely stunned this article made it past an editor's desk. I'll just RT a comment from the reviews: "Finally,…
👏👏 the conclusion should have been "we need to root out bias and provide equal opportunity"
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @dlboebinger: To ignore the pervasive effects of sexism in academia (including in citation practices themselves, as detailed in this pap…
To ignore the pervasive effects of sexism in academia (including in citation practices themselves, as detailed in this paper from another @nature journal: https://t.co/ARpcWgK4fz) and to instead interpret these data as a failing of female mentorship, is ab
RT @DaviesswPhD: This paper disgusts me. All is does is showcase how deep rooted the whole academic system is in the patriarchy and how we…
My new favourite way to start a Tweet: “Garbage alert”
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
Dr. Le Bot @nat_lebot --your thoughts on why you decided to publish this seriously flawed study in @NatureComms would be very helpful/
RT @peiferlabunc: @NatureComms has published a paper which comes to the conclusion that female students should avoid female mentors, based…
That time @NatureComms published a paper in which the results demonstrate the systemic bias against women in academia but the conclusions do their best to perpetuate it. This is ass backward.
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
I have many issues with the conclusions of this paper. I and my lab have benefited immensely from various female mentors and collaborators. My lab members also benefit through numerous informal mentors in my department and in outside universities.
RT @GreeneScientist: TFW you find evidence of sexism in science ( https://t.co/NVVN4bkjxq ) and instead of having your takeaway be "wow, we…
RT @FlyBehaviour: Finding: Female-female mentoring relationships result in lower publication outcomes. Author interpretation: Female-femal…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
RT @stephaniehicks: I'm absolutely stunned this article made it past an editor's desk. I'll just RT a comment from the reviews: "Finally,…
RT @DNLee5: Wow, just wow. Let me say it again...Citation practices are political... Also, commitment to existing inequitable systems must…
There are so many ways to be successful in science and publishing a bunch of papers is really low on the list.
"We also find that increasing the proportion of female mentors is associated not only with a reduction in post-mentorship impact of female protégés, but also a reduction in the gain of female mentors." New paper, I've skimmed it, not fully vetted it. http
RT @Sheril_: When a scientific journal ignores deeply ingrained institutional barriers + implicit bias against women in academia to promote…
RT @millerjm86: Ok all, this new paper in @NatureComms really has me sad/confused/angry https://t.co/HN2gIV4rTt A Thread 1/
Yet more evidence of systemic biases in academia. The solution here isn't to avoid female PIs. It's to address why working with men is better for careers (long-term) and adjust expectations (short-term). The playing field isn't level and never has been.
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…
RT @stephaniehicks: I'm absolutely stunned this article made it past an editor's desk. I'll just RT a comment from the reviews: "Finally,…
RT @CarolynBertozzi: Garbage alert: this “big authorship data” analysis stumbles on what we already know about gender bias in academia, the…