Here we present the first empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that a gender-heterogeneous problem-solving team generally produced journal articles perceived to be higher quality by peers than a team comprised of highly-performing individuals of the same gender. Although women were historically underrepresented as principal investigators of working groups, their frequency as PIs at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis is now comparable to the national frequencies in biology and they are now equally qualified, in terms of their impact on the accumulation of ecological knowledge (as measured by the h-index). While women continue to be underrepresented as working group participants, peer-reviewed publications with gender-heterogeneous authorship teams received 34% more citations than publications produced by gender-uniform authorship teams. This suggests that peers citing these publications perceive publications that also happen to have gender-heterogeneous authorship teams as higher quality than publications with gender uniform authorship teams. Promoting diversity not only promotes representation and fairness but may lead to higher quality science.
Here we present the first empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that a gender-heterogeneous problem-solving team generally produced journal articles perceived to be higher quality by peers than a team comprised of highly-performing individuals of the same gender. Although women were historically underrepresented as principal investigators of working groups, their frequency as PIs at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis is now comparable to the national frequencies in biology and they are now equally qualified, in terms of their impact on the accumulation of ecological knowledge (as measured by the h-index). While women continue to be underrepresented as working group participants, peer-reviewed publications with gender-heterogeneous authorship teams received 34% more citations than publications produced by gender-uniform authorship teams. This suggests that peers citing these publications perceive publications that also happen to have gender-heterogeneous authorship teams as higher quality than publications with gender uniform authorship teams. Promoting diversity not only promotes representation and fairness but may lead to higher quality science.
Understanding the origin and maintenance of community composition through ecological and evolutionary time has been a central challenge in ecology. However little is known about how extinction may alter patterns of phylogenetic and phenotypic structure within communities. To address this, we used past and present primate communities in Madagascar as our model system to explore how a large extinction event within a taxon may alter evolutionary relationships and phenotypic distributions within communities. We also explored the influence of environment on the structure of present‐day lemur communities. We found a phylogenetic pattern of overdispersion in both past and present‐day communities. However, trait structures, including relative dispersion of body masses and trophic niches were altered following extinction. We posit that the overdispersed phylogenetic patterns have resulted from the unique ecological and evolutionary history of Madagascar's primates including a rapid adaptive radiation in the presence of a broad niche‐space available during colonization. Differences in trait structures between present and past primate communities may be reflective of the selective extinction process that eliminated the largest primates from the island. Habitat also appeared to influence the structure of present‐day lemur communities. Lower divergence in patterns of phylogeny, body mass and activity rhythms were found in dry relative to wet habitats. This may be due to potential advantages of being small and nocturnal in environments with low productivity and hot dry climates. We suggest current studies exploring community processes should consider potential effects of past extinction events. Such work is important for understanding community assembly, coexistence, and mechanisms driving extinctions, particularly given the current extinction crisis facing ecosystems globally.
Here we present the first empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that a gender-heterogeneous problem-solving team generally produced journal articles perceived to be higher quality by peers than a team comprised of highly-performing individuals of the same gender. Although women were historically underrepresented as principal investigators of working groups, their frequency as PIs at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis is now comparable to the national frequencies in biology and they are now equally qualified, in terms of their impact on the accumulation of ecological knowledge (as measured by the h-index). While women continue to be underrepresented as working group participants, peer-reviewed publications with gender-heterogeneous authorship teams received 34% more citations than publications produced by gender-uniform authorship teams. This suggests that peers citing these publications perceive publications that also happen to have gender-heterogeneous authorship teams as higher quality than publications with gender uniform authorship teams. Promoting diversity not only promotes representation and fairness but may lead to higher quality science.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.