Abstract
Research collaboration is key to faculty career success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Yet little research has considered how faculty from multiply marginalized identity groups experience collaboration compared to colleagues from majority groups. The present study fills that gap by examining similarities and differences in collaboration experiences of faculty across multiple marginalized groups, and the role of department climate in those experiences. A survey of STEM faculty at a large public research university found that faculty from underrepresented groups – in terms of gender, race, and sexual orientation – had more negative experiences with department-level research collaborations. Moreover, faculty with multiply marginalized identities had worse collaboration experiences than others with a single marginalized identity or none. They also perceived their department climate to be less inclusive, equitable, and transparent; and felt their opinions were less valued in their department than colleagues from majority groups. Negative department climate, in turn, mediated and predicted less hospitable experiences with department-level research collaborations. These data suggest that multiply marginalized faculty, across different identity groups, share some common experiences of a “chilly” department climate relative to their peers from majority groups that impede opportunities for scientific collaboration, a key ingredient for faculty success. These findings have policy implications for retention of diverse faculty in university STEM departments.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of Data and Material
The dataset for this study and associated measures are available at Open Science Framework (osf.io/hjynuosf.io/hjynu).
References
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Murgia, G. (2013). The collaboration behaviors of scientists in Italy. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 442–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.01.009
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2019). A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior. Scientometrics, 120(2), 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03136-6
Armstrong, M. A., & Jovanovic, J. (2015). Starting at the crossroads: Intersectional approaches to institutionally supported underrepresented minority women STEM faculty. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 21(2), 141–157. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2015011275
Badar, K., Hite, J. M., & Badir, Y. F. (2013). Examining the relationship of co-authorship network centrality and gender on academic research performance. Scientometrics, 94(2), 755–775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0764-z
Beaver, D. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study). Scientometrics, 52(3), 365–377. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014254214337
Belle, D., Smith-Doerr, L., & O’Brien, L. M. (2014). Gendered networks. In V. Demos, C.W. Berheide & M.T. Egal (Eds.), Gender Transformation in the Academy (pp. 153–175). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1529-212620140000019007
Biggs, J., Hawley, P. H., & Biernat, M. (2018). The academic conference as a chilly climate for women. Sex Roles, 78(5), 394–408. https://doi-org.silk.library.umass.edu/10.1007/s11199-017-0800-9
Bilimoria, D., & Stewart, A. J. (2009). Don’t ask, don’t tell: The academic climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender faculty in science and engineering. National Women's Studies Association (NWSA) Journal, 21(2), 85–103. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20628175
Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies. Research Policy, 33(4), 599–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.008
Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8
Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). How do men and women differ in research collaborations? Research Policy, 40(10), 1393–1402. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2011.0011
Bozeman, B., & Youtie, J. (2017). The strength in numbers. Princeton University Press.
Britton, D. M. (2017). Beyond the chilly climate. Gender & Society, 31(1), 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243216681494
Browne, I., & Misra, J. (2003). The intersection of gender and race in the labor market. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 487–513. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.29.010202.100016
Bystydzienski, J. M., & Bird, S. R. (2006). Removing barriers: Women in academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Indiana University Press.
Cech, E. A., & Waidzunas, T. J. (2011). Navigating the heteronormativity of engineering. Engineering Studies, 3(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abe0933
Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984). The productivity puzzle: Advances in motivation and achievements. Women in Science, 2, 217–256.
Collins, P. H. (1990). Black Feminist Thought (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.
Dasgupta, N. (2016). Viewpoint: How stereotypes impact women in physics. Physics, 9(87), 1–4.
Dasgupta, N. & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: STEMing the tide. Policy Insights from Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 21–29.
Davidson, M. N., & Purdie-Greenaway, V. (2019). Is D&I about us? How inclusion practices undermine Black advancement and how to design for real inclusion. In L. M. Roberts, A. J. Mayo, & D. A. Thomas (Eds.), Race, work and leadership: New perspectives on the Black experience. Harvard Business Press.
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z
Durbin, S. (2011). Creating knowledge through networks: A gender perspective. Gender, Work & Organization, 18(1), 90–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2010.00536.x
Druskat, V. U., & Wolff, S. B. (2001, March). Building the emotional intelligence of groups. Harvard Business Review.
Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., & Uzzi, B. (2000). Athena unbound. Cambridge University Press.
Evans, T. S., Lambiotte, R., Panzarasa, P., Lambiotte, R., & Panzarasa, P. (2011). Community structure and patterns of scientific collaboration in business and management. Scientometrics, 89(1), 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0439-1
Fleming, S. S., Goldman, A. W., Correll, S. J., & Taylor, C. J. (2016). Settling in: The role of individual and departmental tactics in the development of new faculty networks. Journal of Higher Education, 87(4), 544–572. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2016.0018. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/616448
Fox, M. F. (1991). Gender, environmental milieu, and productivity in science. In H. Zuckerman, J. Cole, & J. Bruer (Eds.), The Outer Circle (pp. 188–204). W.W. Norton.
Fox, M. F. (2008). Collaboration between science and social science. In W. R. Freudenburg & T. I. K. Youn (Eds.), Research in Social Problems and Public Policy (pp. 17–30). Emerald Group.
Fox, M. F., & Mohapatra, S. (2007). Social-organizational characteristics of women and publication productivity among academic scientists in doctoral-granting departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(5), 542–571. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2007.11772329
Freeman, R. B., & Huang, W. (2015). Collaborating with people like me: Ethnic coauthorship within the United States. Journal of Labor Economics, 33(S1), S289–S318. https://doi.org/10.1086/678973
Garvey, J. C., & Rankin, S. S. (2018). The influence of campus climate and urbanization on queer-spectrum and trans-spectrum faculty intent to leave. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 11(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000035
Gaughan, M., Melkers, J., & Welch, E. (2018). Differential social network effects on scholarly productivity. Science Technology & Human Values, 43(3), 570–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917735900
Griffith, E. E., & Dasgupta, N. (2018). How the demographic composition of academic science and engineering departments influences workplace culture, faculty experience, and retention risk. Social Sciences, 7(5), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/SOCSCI7050071
Hall, K. L., Vogel, A. L., Huang, G. C., Serrano, K. J., Rice, E. L., Tsakraklides, S. P., & Fiore, S. M. (2018). The science of team science. American Psychologist, 73(4), 532–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000319532
Hall, R. M., & Sandler, B. R. (1982). The classroom climate: A chilly one for women? Association of American Colleges.
Hart, J. (2016). Dissecting a gendered organization. The Journal of Higher Education, 87(5), 605–634. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777416
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
He, Z. L., Geng, X. S., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2009). Research collaboration and research output. Research Policy, 38(2), 306–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.011
Hirshfield, L. E., & Joseph, T. D. (2012). We need a woman, we need a Black woman: Gender, race, and identity taxation in the academy. Gender and Education, 24(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2011.606208
Jadidi, M., Karimi, F., Lietz, H., & Wagner, C. (2018). Gender disparities in science? Dropout, productivity, collaborations and success of male and female computer scientists. Advances in Complex Systems, 21(3–4). https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219525917500114
Kyvik, S., & Teigen, M. (1996). Childcare, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity. Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(1), 54–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399602100103
Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., & Archambault, É. (2006). Canadian collaboration networks: A comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. Scientometrics, 68(3), 519–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0127-8
Leahey, E. (2016). From sole investigator to team scientist. Annual Review of Sociology, 42(1), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074219
Leahey, E. (2006). Gender differences in productivity. Gender & Society, 20(6), 754–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243206293030
Leahey, E., Beckman, C. M., & Stanko, T. L. (2017). Prominent but less productive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(1), 105–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216665364
Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 623–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359
Liao, C. H. (2011). How to improve research quality? Examining the impacts of collaboration intensity and member diversity in collaboration networks. Scientometrics, 86(3), 747–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0309-2
Long, J. S. (1990). The origins of sex differences in science. Social Forces, 68(4), 1297–1316. https://doi.org/10.1093/SF/68.4.1297
McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), 1771–1800. https://doi.org/10.1086/426800
McDowell, J. M., & Smith, J. K. (1992). The effect of gender-sorting on propensity to coauthor. Economic Inquiry, 30(1), 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1992.tb01536.x
Mehra, A., Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (1998). At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 441–452. https://doi.org/10.5465/257083
Miller, B. P., Duque, R., & Shrum, W. (2012). Gender, ICTs, and productivity in low-income countries. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 37(1), 30–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243910392800
Misra, J., Smith-Doerr, L., Dasgupta, N., Weaver, G., & Normanly, J. (2017). Collaboration and gender equity among academic scientists. Social Sciences, 6(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci6010025
Muhs, G. G. Y., Niemann, Y. N., González C. G., & Harris, A. P. (2012). Presumed incompetent. University Press of Colorado.
National Science Foundation. (2017). Data on Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering. (Special Report NSF 17–310). National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
Ong, M., Wright, C. Espinosa, L., & Orfield, G. (2011). Inside the double bind: A synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 172–209. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.t022245n7x4752v2
Ong, M., Smith, J. M., & Ko, L. T. (2018). Counterspaces for women of color in STEM higher education: Marginal and central spaces for persistence and success. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(2), 206–245. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21417
Patridge, E. V., Barthelemy, R. S., & Rankin, S. R. (2014). Factors impacting the academic climate for LGBQ STEM faculty. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 20(1), 75–98. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2014007429
Pinheiro, D. L., & Melkers, J. E. (2011). The need to look elsewhere: The push and pull of underrepresented minority faculty professional networks. Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy, 2011, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACSIP.2011.6064481
Powell, W. W., Owen-Smith, J., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2011). Sociology and the science of science policy. In J. Lane, K. H. Fealing, J. H. Marburger, & S. S. Shipp (Eds.), Handbook of the Science of Science Policy (pp. 55–84). Stanford University Press.
Preddie, J. P., & Biernat, M. (2021). More than the sum of its parts: Intersections of sexual orientation and race as they influence perceptions of group similarity and stereotype content. Sex Roles, 84(9), 554–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01185-3
Ridgeway, C. (2011). Framed by gender. Oxford University Press.
Riegle-Crumb, C., Peng, M., & Russo-Tait, T. (2020). Committed to STEM? Examining factors that predict occupational commitment among Asian and White female students completing STEM U.S. postsecondary programs. Sex Roles, 82(1), 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01038-8
Rivers, E. (2017). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/
Sacco, T. (2020). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Dimensions of success and failure in research collaboration. Sociological Forum, 35(2), 488–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12591
Sheridan, J., Savoy, J. N., Kaatz, A., Lee, Y. G., Filut, A., & Carnes, M. (2017). Write more articles, get more grants. Journal of Women’s Health, 26(5), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2016.6022
Smith-Doerr, L., & Croissant, J. (2016). Gender equity and interdisciplinary collaboration. Interdisciplinarity Now. The Social Science Research Council. https://items.ssrc.org/interdisciplinarity/gender-equity-and-interdisciplinary-collaboration/
Torres-Olave, B., Brown, A. M., Franco Carrera, L., & Ballinas, C. (2020). Not waving but striving: Research collaboration in the context of stratification, segmentation, and the quest for prestige. The Journal of Higher Education, 91(2), 275–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2019.1631074
Turner, C. S. V. (2002). Women of color in academe: Living with multiple marginality. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2002.11777131
Turner, C. S. V., González, J. C., & Wong, K. (2011). Faculty Women of Color: The critical nexus of race and gender. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4(4), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024630
Uhly, K. M., Visser, L. M., & Zippel, K. S. (2017). Gendered patterns in international research collaborations in academia. Studies in Higher Education, 42(4), 760–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1072151
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1141753
Zambrana, R. E. (2018). Toxic ivory towers. Rutgers University Press.
Zippel, K. S. (2017). Women in global science. Stanford University Press.
Acknowledgements
We are immensely grateful for feedback from members of the University of Massachusetts ADVANCE Leadership Team, especially Dessie Clark, Joya Misra, and Laurel Smith-Doerr.
Funding
This research was funded by NSF ADVANCE-IT Award #1824090, “Collaboration and Equity: The Resources, Relationships, and Recognition (R3) Model for Advancing Women and Underrepresented Faculty in Science and Engineering.” All findings and opinions are the authors’ and do not necessarily represent those of the National Science Foundation (NSF).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Institutional Review Board
This project was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Griffith, E.E., Mickey, E.L. & Dasgupta, N. A “Chillier” Climate for Multiply Marginalized STEM Faculty Impedes Research Collaboration. Sex Roles 86, 233–248 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-021-01259-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-021-01259-w