Overemphasis on publications may disadvantage historically excluded groups in STEM before and during COVID-19: A North American survey-based study.

Publishing is a strong determinant of academic success and there is compelling evidence that identity may influence the academic writing experience and writing output. However, studies rarely quantitatively assess the effects of major life upheavals on trainee writing. The COVID-19 pandemic introduced unprecedented life disruptions that may have disproportionately impacted different demographics of trainees. We analyzed anonymous survey responses from 342 North American environmental biology graduate students and postdoctoral scholars (hereafter trainees) about scientific writing experiences to assess: (1) how identity interacts with scholarly publication totals and (2) how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced trainee perceptions of scholarly writing productivity and whether there were differences among identities. Interestingly, identity had a strong influence on publication totals, but it differed by career stage with graduate students and postdoctoral scholars often having opposite results. We found that trainees identifying as female and those with chronic health conditions or disabilities lag in publication output at some point during training. Additionally, although trainees felt they had more time during the pandemic to write, they reported less productivity and motivation. Trainees who identified as female; Black, Indigenous, or as a Person of Color [BIPOC]; and as first-generation college graduates were much more likely to indicate that the pandemic affected their writing. Disparities in the pandemic's impact on writing were most pronounced for BIPOC respondents; a striking 85% of BIPOC trainees reported that the pandemic affected their writing habits, and overwhelmingly felt unproductive and unmotivated to write. Our results suggest that the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on writing output may only heighten the negative effects commonly reported amongst historically excluded trainees. Based on our findings, we encourage the academy to consider how an overemphasis on publication output during hiring may affect historically excluded groups in STEM-especially in a post-COVID-19 era

Graduate student results for Bayesian multiple regression of how years in school and identity affect publication output.

Except for years in graduate school, all other variables are factorial and coded as 1 = trainee identifies or 0 = trainee does not identify as first generation, female, BIPOC, having a chronic condition, or having English as a second language (ESL). Variables with 80% or higher probability of being on the same side of zero as the estimate (PD sign match) are bolded. 95% CRI = 95% credible interval, ESS = effective sample size. (PDF)</p

Word cloud representation of respondents’ subfield of environmental biology.

Bigger words indicate higher occurrence in the survey responses. (PDF)</p

Breakdown of survey respondent identity.

We allowed respondents to choose their identity preference or NA if they were uncomfortable answering. Below the results are reported as a percentage of total responses within each career stage. (PDF)</p

A full copy of Qualtrics survey used to collect our data.

This copy shows exact question phrasing and survey structure. (PDF)</p

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on trainee writing habits and perceptions of productivity and motivation.

A) When answering the question: “Has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted your writing habits?” the majority of respondents said yes. We then asked follow-up questions on perceived effects of the pandemic on time for writing, productivity, and motivation. B) While many respondents reported having more or much more time for writing, C) most respondents reported that they felt less or much less productive during the pandemic. D) Similarly, the majority of respondents reported feeling less or much less motivated.</p

S2 Fig -

Smoothed density of A) first-authored and B) co-authored publications of respondents separated by career stage. Career stage grad represents graduate students, while postdoc represents postdoctoral scholars. (PDF)</p

Fig 3 -

Binomial multiple regression models suggest identity of graduate students and postdoctoral scholars influenced yes/no responses of A) graduate students (n = 229) and B) postdoctoral scholars (n = 79) to the question “Has COVID-19 impacted your writing habits?”. All estimates are in logit scale for ease of comparison. More positive values indicate a higher probability of answering “yes.” Points are the parameter estimate medians, thick lines are 50% credible intervals (CRIs), and thin lines are 95% CRIs. Graduate and postdoc yrs indicate the number of years in training (as a continuous variable). First gen = first in family to graduate from college; female = female; BIPOC = Black, Indigenous, and/or a person of color; chronic condition = chronic health condition or disability; and ESL = English is the second language of respondents coded categorically (yes/no).</p

Postdoctoral scholar model results for Bayesian multiple regression of how years in training and identity affect publication output.

Years spent as a graduate student and postdoctoral scholar are continuous, and all other variables are factorial and coded as 1 = trainee identifies or 0 = trainee does not identify as first generation, female, BIPOC, having a chronic condition, or having English as a second language (ESL). Variables with 80% or higher probability of being on the same side of zero as the estimate (PD sign match) are bolded. 95% CRI = 95% credible interval, ESS = effective sample size. (PDF)</p