MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409295225 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-1200

Towards family-friendly conferences in the geosciences: results from a first survey

2025· preprint· en· W4409295225 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Päffgen, Lisa Schielicke, Leonie Esters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConferences and Exhibitions Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn
KeywordsComputer scienceData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In the geoscientific field, building an academic career requires a high level of dedication to research, frequent publishing, and maintaining visibility within the academic community. Conferences are the central platforms for networking and knowledge exchange, making them keystones for a scientific career. However, the early stages of an academic career often coincide with family planning considerations. Many young researchers face the challenge of balancing professional responsibilities with family obligations. A balancing act that becomes particularly difficult during non-routine work events such as conferences. Such occasions tend to pose significant organizational challenges for families. As mothers still perform most caregiving, they are disproportionately affected. This conflict is an important factor inhibiting the rise of women through the academic career ladder. Hence, increasing the family friendliness of conferences holds a chance of diversifying the community, allowing more women to participate, while reducing the tension of the academic work-family conflict. In this work, we present the results from an online survey among researchers from the geoscientific field. The required support of parents at conferences is analyzed and the acceptance of researchers without children for the implementation of new support offers is examined. Our key findings are that (1) parents wish for more support at conferences, (2) the majority of non-parents welcome family-friendly measures and (3) conference organizers can accomplish a lot in this respect with small adjustments. The responses we received from parents paint a qualitative picture of measures that can be taken to create a family-friendly conference experience, ranging from an increase of transparency and awareness for the challenges of parents to tangible offers like childcare and financial funding. This feedback invites conference organizers to join the conversation about family support and shows that new measures have great support in the geoscientific community. Our findings are distilled into guidelines for conference organizers, allowing them to better address the work-family conflict and transform their conferences towards more equity, diversity and inclusion.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConferences and Exhibitions ManagementFrench-language works237,207