Gender issues in fundamental physics: Strumia’s bibliometric analysis fails to account for key confounders and confuses correlation with causation

Academic free speech or right-wing grievance?

“…24,34,49 That description substantially sanitizes the tone of a presentation in which Strumia questioned the value of having women in the discipline at all, [84][85][86]95 and also overlooks issues with his analysis itself. 98,99 As a nal example, when the University of Victoria declined to renew an adjunct affiliation with Dr Susan Crockford, 100 a narrative emerged that she had run afoul of the climate-change orthodoxy. 24,100,101 In reality, Crockford has a long history of climate-change denial that is unsupported by scholarly publications.…”

L’Affaire Strumia reveals troubling gatekeeping values and outcomes at Quantitative Science Studies

“…Shortly after QSS agreed to publish the article, Cassidy Sugimoto-current ISSI president and QSS editorial board member-told Science the article was "methodologically flawed," contained "several unsubstantiated claims," and "fails to meet the standards of the bibliometric community" (Chawla, 2019). Following widespread criticism, QSS published four rejoinders-including from two additional editorial board members-identifying substantial empirical flaws and unfounded claims in Strumia (2021) (Andersen et al, 2021;Ball et al, 2021;Hossenfelder, 2021;Thelwall, 2021). This letter is not intended to further relitigate Strumia (2021).…”