Mulheres no mundo da ciência e da publicação científica

Abstract

Recent months have witnessed widespread mobilization of women in numerous countries and fields, with various objectives. Feminist struggles were expressed in the marches protesting the explicitly misogynous U.S. President's inauguration and Brazilian women's resistance to further curtailment of Brazil's already limited right to abortion. The movement has branched out, exposing countless cases of sexual harassment and abuse. The women strengthened each other to speak out, sharing their experiences through MeToo (https:// twitter.com/hashtag/MeToo).Among scientists (and it could not logically be otherwise), allegations of abuse reveal the power relations between thesis supervisors and students, between senior and junior scientists, leading to situations just as serious as those mentioned above, hindering the academic careers of countless promising young women scientists 1 . These situations led the National Science Foundation to demand notification and adoption of measures to control harassment as a condition for the transfer of financial resources 2 .Even more subtle is the daily prejudice that we tend to deny, assuming that gender has no bearing on research evaluation. A recent review of gender bias in scientific journals identified women's underrepresentation, not only among authors, but especially among referees and editors 3 . The bias is not uniform: in the field of mathematics, women represent only 15% of the researchers and are even less represented as editors, with only 10% 4 . The situation is even more serious in the most prestigious scientific journals like Science. Based on the last authors listed in a sample of articles published in 2015, the share of women publishing in Science as either or junior or senior authors was one-third less than their overall percentage in academic institutions in the United States 5 .In Brazil, about half of the publications for the quadrennium 2011-2015 were written by women, a significant increase compared to 38% in the period 1996-2000. However, among the researchers who receive research productivity grants, destined by the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq) to researchers, in order to value scientific production, women are more present at the lower levels 6 . In part, this difference can be explained as resulting from a cohort effect, but it may also be the reproduction of the same pattern observed in organizations in general. The proportion of women in upper-echelon executive positions is far lower than that of men, even in companies with a large female workforce.

Doenças Crônicas Não Transmissíveis na Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva: um estudo bibliométrico

“…This study identified researchers who published the most about NCDs in C&SC, of which the majority were female. In Brazil, women answered for the authorship of approximately half of the publications between the years 2011 and 2015, representing an increase in relation to the period from 1996 to 2000, whose percentage was 38% 60 . However, women still have a lower proportion compared to men, in terms of receiving productivity grants from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq in Portuguese) 61 .…”

Rodas de conversa “Mulheres na Ciência”: o protagonismo feminino no desenvolvimento das ciências

“…Também é relevante considerar que embora dados publicados pela CAPES em 2020 (CAPES, 2020), revelem que 58% das atuais bolsas de pós-graduação fomentadas pelo programa, são pagas para pesquisadoras, estudos apontam que grande parte das mulheres não avança na carreira acadêmica. Nesta perspectiva, ainda se observa maior predominância masculina entre os cargos administrativos, professores do ensino superior, comitês de assessoramentos das agências de fomento ou recebimento de bolsas de produtividade em Pesquisa (CARVALHO; COELI; LIMA, 2018;FERREIRA;FERREIRA, 2022;MONTEIRO;ALTMANN, 2021).…”

40 years of editorials

“…We can say that every topic, every event, every congress, every challenge in the field of Public Health has been addressed in an editorial at some point, as well as the directions of health policy, new (and old) diseases, inequalities, and inequities. The role of women in science and publishing is a frequent topic of our three Editors-in-Chief 26 , but not new in the CSP: in the thematic issue published in 1991, the editorial said “ to conclude, we highlight that (with two honorable exceptions) all authors included here are female authors ” 27 (p. 134). Open science is also an increasingly present topic 28 , 29 , associated with the challenges for a gradually more collective scientific practice 30 .…”