Search

The historical and contemporary under-attribution of women's contributions to scientific scholarship is well-known and well-studied, with effects that are felt today in myriad ways by women scientists. One measure of this under-attribution is the so-called citation gap between men and women: the under-citation of papers authored by women relative to expected rates coupled with a corresponding over-citation of papers authored by men relative to expected rates. We explore the citation gap in contemporary physics, analyzing over one million articles published over the last 25 years in 35 physics journals that span a wide range of subfields. Using a model that predicts papers' expected citation rates according to a set of characteristics separate from author gender, we find a global bias wherein papers authored by women are significantly under-cited, and papers authored by men are significantly over-cited. Moreover, we find that citation behavior varies along several dimensions, such that imbalances differ according to who is citing, where they are citing, and how they are citing. Specifically, citation imbalance in favor of man-authored papers is highest for papers authored by men, papers published in general physics journals, and papers likely to be less familiar to citing authors. Our results suggest that, although deciding which papers to cite is an individual choice, the cumulative effects of these choices needlessly harm a subset of scholars. We discuss several strategies for the mitigation of these effects, including conscious behavioral changes at the individual, journal, and community levels.

Medical imaging technology has allowed for unparalleled insight into the structure and function of the human brain, giving clinicians powerful new tools for disease diagnosis and monitoring. Yet the complex and high-dimensional nature of imaging data makes computational analysis challenging. In multiple sclerosis (MS), this complexity is typically simplified by identifying regions of visible tissue damage and measuring spatial extent. However, many common radiological measures have been shown to be only weakly associated with clinical outcomes (a discovery that has been referred to as “the clinico-radiological paradox”). We attempt to bridge this gap by developing statistical methods capable of extracting clinically relevant information from MRI scans in MS. Here, we discuss three such techniques: a texture modeling approach to improve research on lesion dynamics; a biomarker detection algorithm to support diagnostic decision-making; and a flexible multi-modal group differences test to facilitate exploration of subtle disease processes. The performance of these methods is illustrated using simulated and real data, and the opportunities and obstacles for their clinical use are discussed.

Like many scientific disciplines, neuroscience has increasingly attempted to confront pervasive gender imbalances within the field. While much of the conversation has centered around publishing and conference participation, recent research in other fields has called attention to the prevalence of gender bias in citation practices. Because of the downstream effects that citations can have on visibility and career advancement, understanding and eliminating gender bias in citation practices is vital for addressing inequity in a scientific community. In this study, we sought to determine whether there is evidence of gender bias in the citation practices of neuroscientists. Using data from five top neuroscience journals, we find that reference lists tend to include more papers with men as first and last author than would be expected if gender were not a factor in referencing. Importantly, we show that this overcitation of men and undercitation of women is driven largely by the citation practices of men, and is increasing over time as the field becomes more diverse. We develop a co-authorship network to assess homophily in researchers' social networks, and we find that men tend to overcite men even when their social networks are representative. We discuss possible mechanisms and consider how individual researchers might address these findings in their own practices.

The practice of scientific research is often thought of as individuals and small teams striving for disciplinary advances. Yet as a whole, this endeavor more closely resembles a complex system of natural computation, in which information is obtained, generated, and disseminated more effectively than would be possible by individuals acting in isolation. Currently, the structure of this integrated and innovative landscape of scientific ideas is not well understood. Here we use tools from network science to map the landscape of interconnected research topics covered in the multidisciplinary journal PNAS since 2000. We construct networks in which nodes represent topics of study and edges give the degree to which topics occur in the same papers. The network displays small-world architecture, with dense connectivity within scientific clusters and sparse connectivity between clusters. Notably, clusters tend not to align with assigned article classifications, but instead contain topics from various disciplines. Using a temporal graph, we find that small-worldness has increased over time, suggesting growing efficiency and integration of ideas. Finally, we define a novel measure of interdisciplinarity, which is positively associated with PNAS's impact factor. Broadly, this work suggests that complex and dynamic patterns of knowledge emerge from scientific research, and that structures reflecting intellectual integration may be beneficial for obtaining scientific insight.

As the field of neuroimaging grows, it can be difficult for scientists within the field to gain and maintain a detailed understanding of its ever-changing landscape. While collaboration and citation networks highlight important contributions within the field, the roles of and relations among specific areas of study can remain quite opaque. Here, we apply techniques from network science to map the landscape of neuroimaging research documented in the journal NeuroImage over the past decade. We create a network in which nodes represent research topics, and edges give the degree to which these topics tend to be covered in tandem. The network displays small-world architecture, with communities characterized by common imaging modalities and medical applications, and with bridges that integrate these distinct subfields. Using node-level analysis, we quantify the structural roles of individual topics within the neuroimaging landscape, and find high levels of clustering within the structural MRI subfield as well as increasing participation among topics related to psychiatry. The overall prevalence of a topic is unrelated to the prevalence of its neighbors, but the degree to which a topic becomes more or less popular over time is strongly related to changes in the prevalence of its neighbors. Broadly, this work presents a cohesive model for understanding the landscape of neuroimaging research across the field, in broad subfields, and within specific topic areas.