Citizen social science deepens the human and relational aspects of the social scientific method.

Citizen social science calls on experts and the public to re-evaluate their roles in addressing social problems. Erinma Ochu, a social neuroscientist, elucidates the opportunities on offer when experts let the public in on the business of addressing these pervasive challenges. Real learning comes in the social life of the method – in the practice of listening, trying and often failing to collaborate – trying again and getting into the rhythm of the issue, together

The Social Life of Data

Keynote presentation by Erinma Ochu of the University of Salford at RepoFringe 2016 under the theme "Making a Difference with Data". Abstract: Citizen science is a participatory research practice whereby members of the public contribute to research through sensing, collecting and analysing data. Often citizen science is facilitated by the internet and digital technology including apps and web based games. There are many examples of citizen science initiatives across many disciplines, including projects that address societal or environmental challenges. The rise of citizen science and the increasing use of interactive and emerging technologies to collect, analyse and share data presents new opportunities and challenges for researchers, their institutions and the public creators of these datasets. This presentation looks to the future of publicly engaged research practices and encourages speculation around the challenges, opportunities for impact and potential innovations when data becomes playable and social

Racism, Equity and inclusion in Research Funding.

SCIENCE DEPENDS ON RESEARCH FUNDING Government funded research grants from United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) are the lifeblood of our research ecosystem in science, engineering, technology, mathematics and medicine (STEMM). These grants pay the salaries of researchers, support staff and technicians, allow academics to buy consumables and equipment, and cement partnerships, including access to world class facilities. This pre-determines what knowledge is produced. Winning grants is vital to career progression from being a PhD student, to developing independence as an early career researcher, to running your own lab and hiring a research team. Whilst this article recognises the systemic barriers in progression in higher education and STEMM careers1 that privilege2 ‘white’ people, we focus on evidence within the grant funding system to consider discrepancies in who is given the opportunity to do research and why this matters

Review of barriers women face in research funding processes in the UK

In the UK, women are underrepresented at the highest levels of academia in all subjects but Nursing, but particularly in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) (Advance HE, 2018). Research, and the funding that enables research, is a critical point of career progression. Women apply less often and for lower amounts of funding, and are less successful than male colleagues (UK Research and Innovation, 2018). The common explanations given that women have to apply for more and more often do not sufficiently explain the gender disparities in research funding. This review critically evaluates some of the barriers and biases women face in the process of applying for research funding in the UK. Institutional barriers such as women carrying a heavier burden of teaching and academic citizenship, and lack of support, mentoring and visible role models impact on women’s success in securing research funding. Systematic barriers exist at many levels, particularly for parents and carers. These range from the impact of taking maternity leave, to grant deadlines falling during or shortly after school holidays and the requirement to travel for interviews. The focus on track record in grant review, biased language used in evaluation materials and unconscious biases on the part of reviewers further impact differentially on women. Lack of freedom to travel, and thus to network or attend conferences can result in exclusion from multinational networks and the ability of parents to demonstrate an international profile. The policies and practices that impact on the ability of women to secure research funding must be reviewed and addressed with urgency for the benefit of the research community as a whole. Introduction Barriers Women Face in Research Funding Processes 3 Women are underrepresented in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), with increasingly lower representation from school through academic careers to Professorial level (Blickenstaff, 2005). Eagly and Carli (2007) argues that addressing the problem of recruiting, retaining and progressing women at all career levels in STEM is important as a moral value, and beyond that, increasing women’s participation in a labour market dominated by men could be worth between £15-23 billion (Women and Work Commission, 2009) to the UK economy. Metaanalyses of evidence that women do not succeed to the same extent and pace as their male equivalents show that this is not due to gender differences in intelligence or ability (Hyde, 2005; Hyde, 2016) or even, contrary to popular belief, to motherhood, but rather that the difference in academic career progression between men and women is a result of socially interpreted, cultural differences (Kandola & Kandola, 2013; Santos & Dang Van Phu, 2019; Peel, Schlachta, & Alkhamesi, 2018; Thanacoody, Bartram, Berker, & Jacobs, 2006). These differences become particularly acute for black and ethnic minority women (Jones 2006, Rollock, 2019; Royal Society, 2014), for those with disabilities (Brown & Leigh, 2018; Royal Society, 2014), and those who identify as LGBTQ+ (Gibney, 2019; Wellcome, 2020) as these marginalised groups face further systemic discrimination and career attainment gaps. We note in particular that there is very little data available in the literature or elsehwere on funding disparities faced by those whose gender identities are non-binary, or those who are trans. Intersectionality is a term which was originally coined to describe the ways in which race, gender and class combine to multiply barriers in the workplace for black, working class women (Crenshaw, 1989). This extends to academia and STEM in particular. For instance, in 2019, only 35 out 19,285 UK professors were Black women (as identified by The Higher Education Statistics Agency - HESA). Indeed black women are three times less likely to be professor than white women and half as likely as black men, demonstrating the compounding effects of intersectionality. Barriers Women Face in Research Funding Processes 4 The aim of this literature review is to critically assess the systemic barriers and biases that affect women in the processes relating to applying for and obtaining research funding, a key factor in career progression in STEM academia. Taking an intersectional approach to examining these barriers allows us to take into account how ‘race/ethnicity, class, gender, sexuality, religion, citizenship, ability, and age’, shapes the ‘structural dynamics of power and inequality’, including within academia (Tefera, Powers & Fischman, 2018

A review of barriers women face in research funding processes in the UK

No abstract available

Tracking digital impact (TDI) tool.

The Tracking Digital Impact (TDI) tool is designed to help researchers, research groups, projects and institutions assess their current and future digital engagement strategies in an objective and informed way to support the development of new and improved strategies that more effectively enable good engagement with businesses, communities, the public, governing bodies and other researchers to facilitate better engagement and greater impact. The TDI tool was developed as part of a JISC funded project which focused on identifying, synthesising and embedding business, community and public (BCE) engagement best practices. The TDI tool examined the best practices at the dot.rural Digital Economies hub at the University of Aberdeen and translated those (accompanied by new guidance) into the TDI tool. Parts of this document were sourced from 'Brief Notes on Social Media for Research' by Jennifer Holden (University of Aberdeen, October, 2012). This document describes the TDI tool and its use

Tracking digital impact (TDI) tool: key questions reference.

This is a quick reference summary of the 'Key Questions' developed as part of the large Tracking Digital Impact (TDI) Tool. Users with experience of digital technologies or have previously completed the TDI tool may find this a useful reference when re-assessing or completing new assessments