scholarly journals Retraction Note: The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bedoor AlShebli ◽  
Kinga Makovi ◽  
Talal Rahwan
Keyword(s):  
Early Career ◽  
Junior Author ◽  
Retraction Notice

This article has been retracted. Please see the retraction notice for more detail: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20617-y

scholarly journals Criticism of the paper “The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance”

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esben Kran ◽  
Alina Kereszt ◽  
Andrea Dioni Munksgaard ◽  
Anita Kurm ◽  
Anja Birch Alsøer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Student Body ◽  
Causal Inferences ◽  
Scientific Impact ◽  
Junior Author ◽  
Positive Experiences ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Relationship Assessment

The authors of this letter represent a large student body who have generally had especially positive experiences with female mentors’ advice and mentorships and do not support the conclusions of the article “The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance” because its conclusions regarding gender reach beyond the article’s scope and because the quality of mentorships cannot be analysed only through citation counts. Publications are not equivalent to learning outcomes or professional advancement.After careful review of the aforementioned article, we see numerous scientific flaws. The causal inferences that can be drawn from the observed effects of gender on the mentor-protégé relationship are insubstantial and other aspects of the paper are limited in the reductionist design of their mentor-protégé relationship assessment, which is based on the scientific impact of future papers.

scholarly journals “Why MANtoring is not the solution. A Rebuttal to ‘The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance.’”

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia L. Mabry ◽  
Nilanjana Dasgupta ◽  
Corinne Alison Moss-Racusin ◽  
Lora E Park ◽  
Franco Pestilli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Similar Reasoning ◽  
Junior Author ◽  
Culture Of Science ◽  
Mentorship Programs ◽  
Culture In Science ◽  
Do So

The findings of AlShebli Makovi & Rahwan1 highlight an endemic problem in science: co-authoring with men is associated with greater numbers of citations for junior scientists than co-authoring with women. The reasons for this likely stem from a long history and culture in science where White, straight, cisgender men are the dominant force. Under the authors’ assumption that authorship is equal to mentorship (a notion we criticize below), the reported citation disparity by coauthor gender for junior scientists may simply reflect that under the current status quo there are more barriers for women to establish strong mentorship programs and secure resources to support their mentees compared to men. In other words, citation disparity is the problem, not the solution as proposed by the authors. We argue that the citation disparity is uncorrelated with mentorship and the quality of the publication. Unfortunately, AlShebli Makovi & Rahwan err in their publication in two ways: they define mentorship as co-authorship (albeit with conditions), and they prescribe the problem as a solution suggesting that junior scientists, especially women, ought to be mentored by men - a proposal we have aptly named “MANtoring”. These faulty interpretations and conclusions reveal a broader problem in scholarship: failure to critically examine structural biases and assumptions when evaluating and interpreting data showing disparity. Much work is needed to improve the culture of science and to provide a more fair and equitable environment for individuals of any background (women in this case, but a similar reasoning would apply to people historically marginalized based on gender, race, sexuality, class, and other dimensions) to thrive2. The AlShebli et al article is a wakeup call to authors in all disciplines to take greater care in interpreting and acting on their disparity data. Failure to do so could have catastrophic effects on science including the irony of exacerbating the very problems researchers are attempting to address.

scholarly journals Comment on: The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Cebula ◽  
Caroline Gauchotte-Lindsay ◽  
catherine lido ◽  
Helen Mulvana
Keyword(s):  
Recent Article ◽  
Theoretical Foundation ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Academic Careers ◽  
Short Paper ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Junior Author ◽  
Citation Bias ◽  
Career Benefits ◽  
Very High

This comment is written in response to the recent article published in Nature Communications (17th November 2020) entitled, ‘The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance’ by AlShebli et al. This short paper provides a theoretical foundation based upon current literature to propose an alternative framework from which to conduct the analysis of the data collected by AlShebli et al. (2020).We believe that AlShebli et al’s (2020) results corroborate, at unique scale, the well-documented gender citation bias. We find that the interpretation of the data, that junior academic careers (both men and women) see greater career benefits when being mentored by senior men, is lacking theoretical foundation and not cognisant of the accepted knowledge on this topic. We are motivated in responding to this article by our concern that should this interpretation go unchallenged, we see a very high risk to the participation and progression of women in STEM academia.

The Social Origins and Provenance of the English Bishops during the Reign of Edward II

1959 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 51-79
Author(s):  
K. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Social Background ◽  
Early Career ◽  
The Political ◽  
Social Origins ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Edward Ii ◽  
The Social ◽  
Complete Study ◽  
History Of

During the last twenty or twenty-five years medieval historians have been much interested in the composition of the English episcopate. A number of studies of it have been published on periods ranging from the eleventh to the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. A further paper might well seem superfluous. My reason for offering one is that most previous writers have concentrated on analysing the professional circles from which the bishops were drawn, and suggesting the influences which their early careers as royal clerks, university masters and students, secular or regular clergy, may have had on their later work as bishops. They have shown comparatively little interest in their social background and provenance, except for those bishops who belonged to magnate families. Some years ago, when working on the political activities of Edward II's bishops, it seemed to me that social origins, family connexions and provenance might in a number of cases have had at least as much influence on a bishop's attitude to politics as his early career. I there fore collected information about the origins and provenance of these bishops. I now think that a rather more careful and complete study of this subject might throw further light not only on the political history of the reign, but on other problems connected with the character and work of the English episcopate. There is a general impression that in England in the later middle ages the bishops' ties with their dioceses were becoming less close, and that they were normally spending less time in diocesan work than their predecessors in the thirteenth century.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document