There is a leaky pipeline problem for women in science. Math stands out especially when it comes to comparable gender representation, with lower rates of women at the undergraduate, graduate, post-doc, and faculty levels compared to other STEM fields. Journal editors are basically the pinnacle of the pipeline - but we've never had that data before. We made this dataviz to show what we found.
$8k was spent entirely for MTurkers to scrape, sort, and infer gender, geographic location, and title for over 13,000 editors and 435 math journals. The result is that only 8% of math journal editors are women, and this dataviz is every one of them. Using their protocol, this could be very easily replicated for other fields of study. This result was also recently published in PLoS.
Fun facts:
- Only 8% of editors are women
- 51/435 math journals have ZERO women editors
- Japan and Russia have significantly fewer women math journal editors
- Impact factor is positively correlated with higher representation of women in editor positions
$8k was spent entirely for MTurkers to scrape, sort, and infer gender, geographic location, and title for over 13,000 editors and 435 math journals. The result is that only 8% of math journal editors are women, and this dataviz is every one of them. Using their protocol, this could be very easily replicated for other fields of study. This result was also recently published in PLoS.
Fun facts:
- Only 8% of editors are women
- 51/435 math journals have ZERO women editors
- Japan and Russia have significantly fewer women math journal editors
- Impact factor is positively correlated with higher representation of women in editor positions