# Women and minorities in research

Rachel Torchet, Emre Özel, Enka Blanchard, Camille Maumet

► To cite this version:

Rachel Torchet, Emre Özel, Enka Blanchard, Camille Maumet. Women and minorities in research. MIDL 2024 - Medical Imaging with Deep Learning Conference - Doctoral Symposium, Jul 2024, Paris, France., 2024. [hal-04653360](https://hal-04653360v1)

HAL Id: hal-04653360

https://inria.hal.science/hal-04653360v1

Submitted on 18 Jul 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Women and minorities in research

1. Disparities, inequalities and biases in science : guidelines for STEM conference organizers - Rachel Torchet

2. Gender biases in grant allocation - Emre Özel

3. Non-visible biases and the underside of these biases - Enka Blanchard

4. Gender equality: acting from within the lab - Camille Maumet
# Disparities, inequalities and biases in science : guidelines for STEM conference organizers

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

MIDL
Paris 2024

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

## Spotlight the Code of Conduct

The Code of Conduct should highlight all the essential values of your conference organisation. Please make sure that the document is not only easily accessible and available in all concerned languages, but it is also shared actively with all stakeholders, including speakers and attendees. It is essential to make sure that detailed conference policies are acknowledged by members of organisation committee and hosting institution. In addition, it is encouraged to share your conference's Code of Conduct in more interactive and easy-to-read formats, such as infographics and quizzes.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

## Attention to discrimination & harassment

Raise awareness of gender-discrimination and sexual harassment through sharing information and developing an effective reporting system. Apart from re-examining the existing conference policies with attention to discrimination and harassment, conference organisers should make sure that clear and accessible tools of reporting violations of the policies are in place and shared with all conference participants prior to their attendance at conference. Depending on the size of the conference, appointing one or more safeguarding leads to observe and report inappropriate behaviours can be highly beneficial.

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

## Keep track of gender statistics

We highly recommend organisers to record gender parity among organisers, speakers and attendees in conferences, especially in annual conferences. It is important to self-evaluate frequently and work towards improvement. With respect of diversity and inclusion, collection of such data requires the organisers to provide an extensive list of gender options instead of only men and women.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

## Seek diversity and inclusion expertise

Conference organisers are advised to include a diversity and inclusion consultant throughout the stages of conference planning, implementation and evaluation. An external consultant who has no connection with organisation committee or hosting institution can be especially beneficial in avoiding the potential "insider bias". Such role is expected to provide professional opinions, practical tools and actionable solutions.

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

## Observe your conferences

Academic conferences are a great opportunity to discuss and communicate on the topic of gender bias in science. One of the easiest and most effective way to raise such awareness and gain valuable insights is conducting observational studies (for example, on question-asking behaviours). You may use practical tips provided in our project as references to observe your conferences.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

## Provide childcare support

The frequent lack of childcare support has barred many parents, especially mothers, from attending academic conferences. It is recommended to either provide childcare facilities at the conference or offer childcare funds to the needed participants if the conference takes place virtually. If the conference is unable to support all funding applicants, conference organisers can take into consideration several factors when selecting the final candidates, such as the applicants' gender, marriage status, salary level, seniority, and nationality.

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

## Adopt gender-sensitive language

Provide practical tools and advice for speakers, moderators and chairpersons to ensure that the use of language during the conference is gender-sensitive and gender-inclusive. For instance, avoid gendered pronouns when the person's gender is unknown. If possible, it is helpful to include examples of what gender-biased and gender-discriminatory communication is and how to avoid it.

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

## Support minorities in question-asking

Based on previous literature and our research findings, conference organisers may consider taking the following actions to encourage women and other minorities to ask questions during conferences:

* If possible, moderators and chairpersons can give the opportunity of asking the first question after a talk to a junior female attendee (e.g., a female PhD student).

* A quick pause before starting the Q&A session may give attendees, especially those who are generally hesitant to ask questions, more time to construct their questions.

* Ensuring gender diversity and parity in speakers can also encourage female and other minority to attend conferences and ask questions during conferences.
<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

# Disparities, inequalities and biases in science : guidelines for STEM conference organizers

* 33% of questions are asked by women

* Senior men ask 9.5 times more questions

## Conferences guidelines:

* Clear code of conduct

* % minorities: speakers

* Use sensitive language

* Pay attention to discrimination & harassment

* Line of questionning: Men challenging questions vs women methodology
<table><caption>Table 1: Previous empirical studies on gender bias in grant peer-review</caption><thead><tr><th>Reference</th><th>Country</th><th>RFO</th><th>Period</th><th>Discipline</th><th>Dependent Variable</th><th>Gender Effect</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Banal-Estañol et al. (2019)</td><td>UK</td><td>EPSRC</td><td>1991-2007</td><td>Engineering and Physical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Bautista-Puig et al. (2019)</td><td>EU</td><td>ERC</td><td>2007-2016</td><td>All Disciplines</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Bedi et al. (2012)</td><td>UK</td><td>Wellcome Trust</td><td>2000-2008</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Bol et al. (2022)</td><td>Netherlands</td><td>NWO</td><td>2005-2016</td><td>All Disciplines</td><td>Scores+Evaluation stages</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Burns et al. (2019)</td><td>Canada</td><td>CIHR</td><td>2000-2014</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Cañibano et al. (2009)</td><td>Spain</td><td>Ramón y Cajal Programme</td><td>2005-2006</td><td>Physics, Molecular Biology, Philosophy and Philology</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Ginther et al. (2011)</td><td>USA</td><td>NIH</td><td>2000-2006</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Ginther et al. (2016)</td><td>USA</td><td>NIH</td><td>2000-2006</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Head et al. (2013)</td><td>UK</td><td>Various</td><td>1997-2010</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Jagsi et al. (2009)</td><td>USA</td><td>NIH</td><td>1993-2007</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Lerchenmueller and Sorenson (2018)</td><td>USA</td><td>NIH</td><td>1985-2015</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Magua et al. (2017)</td><td>USA</td><td>NIH</td><td>2010-2014</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Scores+Sentiment analysis</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Mutz et al. (2012)</td><td>Austria</td><td>ASF</td><td>1999-2009</td><td>All Disciplines</td><td>Scores+Awarded or not</td><td>Small</td></tr><tr><td>Polhaus et al. (2011)</td><td>USA</td><td>NIH</td><td>1999-2004</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Mixed Results</td></tr><tr><td>Sandström and Hällsten (2008)</td><td>Sweden</td><td>VR</td><td>2004</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Scores</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Severin et al. (2020)</td><td>Switzerland</td><td>SNSF</td><td>2009-2016</td><td>All Disciplines</td><td>Scores</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Tamblyn et al. (2018)</td><td>Canada</td><td>CIHR</td><td>2001-2005</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>van der Lee and Ellemers (2015)</td><td>Netherlands</td><td>NWO</td><td>2010-2012</td><td>All Disciplines</td><td>Scores+Sentiment analysis +Evaluation stages</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Witteman et al. (2019)</td><td>Canada</td><td>CIHR</td><td>2011-2016</td><td>Biomedical Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Yip et al. (2020)</td><td>Hong Kong</td><td>Uni. of Hong Kong</td><td>2015-2020</td><td>Social Sciences</td><td>Awarded or not</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Bianchini et al. (2022)</td><td>EU</td><td>ESF</td><td>2003-2010</td><td>All Disciplines</td><td>Scores+Sentiment analysis+Awarded or not</td><td>Yes</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes: Gender bias in research funding has been studied by different research areas, across disciplines and countries for more than three decades. See, e.g., Bornmann et al. (2007) and Marsh et al. (2009) for a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the literature published before 2007. The studies mentioned in this table start from 2008. Only a few studies examine the review materials and each step of the grant evaluation process.
<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

# Gender biases in grant allocation

* If there is more women in your consortia, your research is less likely to be funded

* In grant evalutation, 31% of women

* In most consortia ☐ closer to 20%

* In europe data is not disclosed due to GDPR

* Women's work get cited less, do not get as high position as men

* Do we need women quota in grant approval ? ☐ does not work since women are also biased against women

* For reviewers, career breaks are not a good thing (pregnancy)

* How to unbias the grant scheme ☐ No idea, because the peer reviewers will always be biased in some way

* ☐ applying guidelines from DORA & COARA fixes a big part of the problems
<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

# Diversity in research versus excellence and productivity

* What is the effect of having a quota in research

* Gets minorities in research ☐ can/will look at things others do not look at, since they're not directly at risk

* A lot of the metrics are bad:

* For grants

* For recruitment

* Defining what a better and more productive researcher is ?

* The question of quota is not the good question, since we do not have the metrics to correctly compare 2 researchers

* Quotas: good way to get the foot in the door

* Can it get us to rely a little less on metrics ?

* How representative is it of the population who actually have the oppotunitites
<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>

ité
FEMMES
HOMES

cnrs

Inria

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

UMR

IRISA

**Gender equality committee**
at IRISA / Inria Rennes, France

https://egalite-fh.irisa.fr

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /></figure>

## Team work!

### Members of the gender-equality committee (2023/2024)

Santiago Sara Bautista. Michèle Basseville. Nathalie Bertrand. Louis Béziaud. Tassadit Bouadi. Peggy Cellier. Bertrand Coüasnon. Enora Denimal Goy. Jamal El Hachem. Ulrich Fahrenberg. Élisa Fromont. Nathalie Girard. Nolwenn Jegou. Camille Juigné. Jérémy Lefort-Besnard. Mael Le Treust. Nicolas Markey (resp.) Camille Maumet (resp.). Camille Muller. Anne-Cécile Orgerie. Charlotte Pelletier. Martin Quinson. Patrice Quinton. Aline Roumy. Camille Sicot. Anne Siegel.

As well as **many lab members** who join for a given activity and the **support team** (admin, audio, comm').
<figure><img src="image_18.png" /></figure>

Gender equality: acting from within the lab

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /><figcaption>Scientific
Outreach</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /><figcaption>Events</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /><figcaption>Inclusive
workspace</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_22.png" /><figcaption>Data</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /><figcaption>Careers</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_24.png" /></figure>
# Gender equality: acting from within the lab

<figure><img src="image_25.png" /></figure>

MIDL
Paris 2024

Images: undraw.co

Internal
Communication

<figure><img src="image_26.png" /></figure>

Scientific
Outreach

<figure><img src="image_27.png" /></figure>

Events

<figure><img src="image_28.png" /></figure>

Inclusive
workspace

<figure><img src="image_29.png" /></figure>

Data

<figure><img src="image_30.png" /></figure>

Careers

<figure><img src="image_31.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_32.png" /></figure>

Reading circle

A group of early career
researchers

1 book per session

Meeting every week to discuss

<figure><img src="image_33.png" /></figure>

Feminist Literature for
Computer Scientists

<figure><img src="image_34.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_35.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_36.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_37.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_38.png" /></figure>

and Véronne
 Yepmo, supported
by Antoine L'Azou.
# Gender equality: acting from within the lab

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /></figure>

MIDL
Paris 2024

Internal
Communication

<figure><img src="image_40.png" /></figure>

Scientific
Outreach

<figure><img src="image_41.png" /></figure>

Events

<figure><img src="image_42.png" /></figure>

Inclusive
workspace

<figure><img src="image_43.png" /></figure>

Data

<figure><img src="image_44.png" /></figure>

Careers

<figure><img src="image_45.png" /></figure>

Images: undraw.co

## Free menstrual products

Fighting menstrual insecurity and
also just-in-case

Available in the infirmary

Posters in each restroom (men and
women)

<figure><img src="image_46.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_47.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_48.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_49.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_50.png" /></figure>

and CLHSCT,
supported by
Agnès Cottais.

## Pas de protection
menstruelle avec vous ?

Serviettes et tampons sont à votre disposition
gratuitement à l'infirmerie (A018)

<figure><img src="image_51.png" /></figure>

## No more menstrual products?

Pads and tampons are available free of charge
in the infirmary (A018)

ité
FEMMES
egalité-fh.irisa.fr

Pour toute question relative
à cette offre contactez la
commission Égalité F/H

For any question related to this
offer, please contact the
Gender Equality Commission

<figure><img src="image_52.png" /></figure>

IRISA

Inria

<figure><img src="image_53.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_54.png" /></figure>

# Gender equality: acting from within the lab

Images: undraw.co

Internal
Communication

<figure><img src="image_55.png" /></figure>

Scientific
Outreach

<figure><img src="image_56.png" /></figure>

Events

<figure><img src="image_57.png" /></figure>

Inclusive
workspace

<figure><img src="image_58.png" /></figure>

Data

<figure><img src="image_59.png" /></figure>

Careers

<figure><img src="image_60.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_61.png" /></figure>

## Mentoring program

<figure><img src="image_62.png" /></figure>

- Pair mentor / mentee

- Meet for a year

- Discuss topics chosen by the mentee

<figure><img src="image_63.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_64.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_65.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_66.png" /></figure>

and Elise Bannier, Ronan Gaugne, Anne Buzaré, Isabelle Monjaret, supported by Michèle Basseville, Nathalie Bertrand, Thierry Jéron, Sylvain Orain, ...
<figure><img src="image_67.png" /></figure>

Gender equality: acting from within the lab

* Possible to have a committee with tens of people because the lab is big (circa 800 people)

* All sorts of reactions to initiatives but in general, not to much push-back.

* Mandatory training for all supervisors (permanent staff) about harassment was supported by the institute. Received some push-back but in the end over 90% of staff were trained.

* The committee focus on women in science but more work is needed to support other minorities in science.