[Paper Review] An annotated bibliography of work related to gender in science

Greg Martin|arXiv (Cornell University)|Dec 12, 2014

Education, Achievement, and Giftedness39 references3 citations

TL;DR

This annotated bibliography compiles and analyzes over 100 sources on gender disparities in science, particularly mathematics, examining implicit and explicit biases, educational inequities, and systemic barriers. It presents statistical evidence showing a strong correlation (p < 10^-12) between the proportion of female organizers and female speakers at major mathematics conferences, supporting structural interventions to improve gender representation in STEM.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this manuscript is to gather together a large amount of source material pertaining to women in mathematics, from studies of girls in elementary school through data on females winning prizes for mathematical research. Along the way, we have also gathered a large amount of material from the psychology and sociology literature on implicit biases more generally, particularly pertaining to gender. This source material was then used to support the writing of the article "Addressing the underrepresentation of women in mathematics conferences". We have referred to primary research literature whenever possible, although we have also included well-written blog posts, organizational web sites, self-published articles by research organizations, and even a YouTube video. Each bibliography entry is accompanied by some remarks summarizing its content and representative quotes from the articles themselves. Much of the work in this bibliography contains a large number of further references to the relevant research literature.

Motivation & Objective

• To compile and critically evaluate a broad range of primary and secondary sources on gender representation in science, especially mathematics.
• To investigate the role of implicit and explicit gender biases in educational and professional settings across STEM fields.
• To examine systemic factors such as standardized testing, leadership expectations, and evaluation practices that contribute to underrepresentation of women in science.
• To provide data-driven insights into gender disparities in academic mathematics, including conference speaking roles and award distributions.
• To offer actionable recommendations for reducing gender inequity in STEM through structural and cultural reforms.

Proposed method

• Systematic collection of primary research, institutional reports, blog posts, and multimedia (e.g., YouTube videos) relevant to gender in science.
• Categorization of sources by thematic focus, including implicit bias, classroom dynamics, leadership disparities, and self-concept issues.
• Statistical analysis using binomial regression to model the relationship between female representation among conference organizers and female speakers at the 2014 Joint Mathematics Meetings.
• Weighting of data points by session size to ensure accurate representation in regression analysis.
• Inclusion of empirical data from major mathematics conferences (ICM 2014, JMM 2014) and prize award records (e.g., Fields Medal, Abel Prize).
• Use of anonymized author references (initials only) to reduce unconscious gender bias in evaluation of cited works.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 To what extent do implicit and explicit gender biases influence academic outcomes in science and mathematics?
• RQ2 How do classroom dynamics and teacher interactions contribute to gender gaps in math achievement?
• RQ3 What is the relationship between the gender composition of conference organizers and the gender representation of speakers at major mathematics conferences?
• RQ4 How do standardized testing and evaluation practices reinforce or mitigate gender disparities in STEM?
• RQ5 What structural and cultural changes can effectively reduce underrepresentation of women in science and mathematics?

Key findings

• A statistically significant association (p = 8.91 × 10^-13) exists between the proportion of female organizers and the proportion of female speakers at sessions during the 2014 Joint Mathematics Meetings.
• The 2014 ICM featured 13 out of 56 Fields Medalists as women, indicating persistent underrepresentation in top-tier mathematics awards.
• Among 10 top mathematics journals, only 8 out of 245 editorial board members were women, highlighting gender imbalance in academic publishing leadership.
• Female representation among invited speakers at the 2014 ICM was 14.3% (13 out of 91), with notable disparities across sections such as 0% in Topology and 10% in Number Theory.
• The analysis of conference data shows that sessions with higher proportions of female organizers consistently had higher proportions of female speakers, suggesting a causal link.
• The bibliography identifies 95 distinct sources on implicit bias, with strong evidence that such biases are widespread, often unrecognized, and deeply embedded in academic culture.