MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922774466 · doi:10.17159/sajs.2019/5515

gender perspective on career challenges experienced by African scientists

2019· article· en· W2922774466 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Heidi Prozesky, Johann Mouton

Bibliographic record

VenueSouth African Journal of Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyUniversiteit StellenboschPolytechnique MontréalDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaRobert Bosch StiftungInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Career developmentPolitical sciencePublic relationsEngineering ethicsSociologyEngineeringComputer sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical knowledge of the career challenges that confront African scientists, and women scientists in particular, holds an important key to achieving future success in the science systems of the continent. In this article, we address a lack of evidence generally on the careers of scientists in Africa, by providing the first continent-wide description of the challenges they face, and how these challenges differ between women and men. Our analysis of questionnaire-survey data on approximately 5000 African scientists from 30 countries shows that women are not more challenged than men by a variety of career-related issues, with the exception of balancing work and family, which the majority of women, regardless of age and region, experience. Contrary to expectations, women are not only less likely than men to report a lack of funding as having impacted negatively on their careers, but have been more successful at raising research funding in the health sciences, social sciences and humanities. These results, as well as those from a comparison of women according to age and region, are linked to existing scholarship, which leads us to recommend priorities for future interventions aimed at effectively ensuring the equal and productive participation of women in the science systems of Africa. These priorities are addressing women’s work–family role conflict; job security among younger women scientists; and women in North African and Western African countries. Significance: This study is the first to describe, on a multinational scale, the career challenges that confront African scientists, and women scientists in particular. Contrary to expectations, we found that African women scientists do not report experiencing career challenges to a larger extent than men do, and have been more successful at raising research funding in three of the six major scientific fields. However, the findings highlight the significance of the challenge that balancing work and family poses to the majority of African women scientists.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
DomainIncentives
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSouth African Journal of ScienceSame topicDiversity and Career in MedicineFrench-language works237,207