Perceived and observed biases within scientific communities : a case study in movement ecology
(2025) In Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 292(2051).- Abstract
Who conducts biological research, where they do it and how results are disseminated vary among geographies and identities. Identifying and documenting these forms of bias by research communities is a critical step towards addressing them. We documented perceived and observed biases in movement ecology, a rapidly expanding sub-discipline of biology, which is strongly underpinned by fieldwork and technology use. We surveyed attendees before an international conference to assess a baseline within-discipline perceived bias (uninformed perceived bias). We analysed geographic patterns in Movement Ecology articles, finding discrepancies between the country of the authors' affiliation and study site location, related to national economics. We... (More)
Who conducts biological research, where they do it and how results are disseminated vary among geographies and identities. Identifying and documenting these forms of bias by research communities is a critical step towards addressing them. We documented perceived and observed biases in movement ecology, a rapidly expanding sub-discipline of biology, which is strongly underpinned by fieldwork and technology use. We surveyed attendees before an international conference to assess a baseline within-discipline perceived bias (uninformed perceived bias). We analysed geographic patterns in Movement Ecology articles, finding discrepancies between the country of the authors' affiliation and study site location, related to national economics. We analysed race-gender identities of USA biology researchers (the closest to our sub-discipline with data available), finding that they differed from national demographics. Finally, we discussed the quantitatively observed bias at the conference, to assess within-discipline perceived bias informed with observational data (informed perceived bias). Although the survey indicated most conference participants as bias-aware, conversations only covered a subset of biases. We discuss potential causes of bias (parachute-science, fieldwork accessibility), solutions and the need to evaluate mitigatory action effectiveness. Undertaking data-driven analysis of bias within sub-disciplines can help identify specific barriers and move towards the inclusion of a greater diversity of participants in the scientific process.
(Less)
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025-07-23
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- academic conference, diversity, equity, journal authorship, parachute science, representation
- in
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- volume
- 292
- issue
- 2051
- article number
- 20250679
- publisher
- Royal Society Publishing
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:40695346
- scopus:105011691585
- ISSN
- 0962-8452
- DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2025.0679
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- additional info
- Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s).
- id
- 19a9fe1e-d7d0-4c96-b683-76e694abebef
- date added to LUP
- 2025-12-02 08:43:13
- date last changed
- 2025-12-08 18:23:03
@article{19a9fe1e-d7d0-4c96-b683-76e694abebef,
abstract = {{<p>Who conducts biological research, where they do it and how results are disseminated vary among geographies and identities. Identifying and documenting these forms of bias by research communities is a critical step towards addressing them. We documented perceived and observed biases in movement ecology, a rapidly expanding sub-discipline of biology, which is strongly underpinned by fieldwork and technology use. We surveyed attendees before an international conference to assess a baseline within-discipline perceived bias (uninformed perceived bias). We analysed geographic patterns in Movement Ecology articles, finding discrepancies between the country of the authors' affiliation and study site location, related to national economics. We analysed race-gender identities of USA biology researchers (the closest to our sub-discipline with data available), finding that they differed from national demographics. Finally, we discussed the quantitatively observed bias at the conference, to assess within-discipline perceived bias informed with observational data (informed perceived bias). Although the survey indicated most conference participants as bias-aware, conversations only covered a subset of biases. We discuss potential causes of bias (parachute-science, fieldwork accessibility), solutions and the need to evaluate mitigatory action effectiveness. Undertaking data-driven analysis of bias within sub-disciplines can help identify specific barriers and move towards the inclusion of a greater diversity of participants in the scientific process.</p>}},
author = {{Shaw, Allison K. and Fouda, Leila and Mezzini, Stefano and Kim, Dongmin and Chatterjee, Nilanjan and Wolfson, David and Abrahms, Briana and Attias, Nina and Beardsworth, Christine E. and Beltran, Roxanne S. and Binning, Sandra A. and Blincow, Kayla M. and Chan, Ying Chi and Fronhofer, Emanuel A. and Hegemann, Arne and Hurme, Edward R. and Iannarilli, Fabiola and Kellner, Julie B. and Mccoy, Karen D. and Rafiq, Kasim and Saastamoinen, Marjo and Sequeira, Ana M.M. and Serota, Mitchell W. and Sumasgutner, Petra and Tao, Yun and Torstenson, Martha and Yanco, Scott W. and Beck, Kristina B. and Bertram, Michael G. and Beumer, Larissa T. and Bradarić, Maja and Clermont, Jeanne and Ellis-Soto, Diego and Faltusová, Monika and Fieberg, John and Hall, Richard J. and Kölzsch, Andrea and Lai, Sandra and Lee-Cruz, Larisa and Loretto, Matthias Claudio and Loveridge, Alexandra and Michelangeli, Marcus and Müller, Thomas and Riotte-Lambert, Louise and Sapir, Nir and Scacco, Martina and Teitelbaum, Claire S. and Cagnacci, Francesca}},
issn = {{0962-8452}},
keywords = {{academic conference; diversity; equity; journal authorship; parachute science; representation}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{07}},
number = {{2051}},
publisher = {{Royal Society Publishing}},
series = {{Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences}},
title = {{Perceived and observed biases within scientific communities : a case study in movement ecology}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2025.0679}},
doi = {{10.1098/rspb.2025.0679}},
volume = {{292}},
year = {{2025}},
}