Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Gender disparities among independent fellows in biomedical research


Independent fellowships provide an opportunity for junior scientists to found their own lab directly after completing their PhD. However, these positions show a striking gender bias that has remained consistent for almost 30 years.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Few women are hired as independent fellows.
Figure 2: Independent fellows typically become productive tenure-track faculty members.
Figure 3: Gender balance of the applicant pools for the DP5 and for three independent fellow programs.


  1. Nelson, D.J. Diversity of science and engineering faculty at research universities. in Diversity in the Scientific Community Volume 1: Quantifying Diversity and Formulating Success 1255, 15–86 (American Chemical Society, 2017).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. US National Science Foundation. Science and Engineering Doctorates – NCSES. (2017).

  3. Moss-Racusin, C.A. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 16474–16479 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Reuben, E., Sapienza, P. & Zingales, L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 4403–4408 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Milkman, K.L., Akinola, M. & Chugh, D. Psychol. Sci. 23, 710–717 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Clancy, K.B.H., Nelson, R.G., Rutherford, J.N. & Hinde, K. PLoS One 9, e102172 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wolfinger, N.H. et al. J. Higher Educ. 79, 388–405 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Adamo, S.A. BioScience 63, 43–48 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Martinez, E.D. et al. EMBO Rep. 8, 977–981 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ceci, S.J. & Williams, W.M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 3157–3162 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Meyers, L.C., Brown, A.M., Moneta-Koehler, L. & Chalkley, R. PLoS One 13, e0190606 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gibbs, K.D. et al. Elife 5, e21393 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Goulden, M. et al. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 638, 141–162 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Alberts, B., Kirschner, M.W., Tilghman, S. & Varmus, H. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 5773–5777 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Schillebeeckx, M., Maricque, B. & Lewis, C. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 938–941 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Stephan, P. & Ma, J. Am. Econ. Rev. 95, 71–75 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Levitt, M. & Levitt, J.M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114, 6498–6503 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sheltzer, J.M. & Smith, J.C. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 10107–10112 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Carnegie Institution for Science. Department of Embryology, Staff Associate program. (accessed 17 September 2018).

  20. Whitehead Institute. Fellows program. (accessed 17 September 2018).

  21. UCSF Sandler Fellows Program. About the program. (2015, accessed 17 September 2018).

  22. Salk Institute for Biological Studies. Salk Fellows.

  23. Broad Institute. Schmidt Fellows program. (accessed 17 September 2018)

  24. Collins, F. Nature 467, 635 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. von Bubnoff, A. Cell 128, 1023–1026 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Powell, K. Nature 429, 786–787 (2004).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Heggeness, M.L., Carter-Johnson, F., Schaffer, W.T. & Rockey, S.J. Cell Stem Cell 19, 15–18 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Blau, D.M. & Weinberg, B.A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114, 3879–3884 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Russo, E. Nature 422, 354–355 (2003).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Powell, K. Nature 520, 144–147 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bickel, P.J., Hammel, E.A. & O'connell, J.W. Science 187, 398–404 (1975).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Fuhrmann, C.N., Halme, D.G., O'Sullivan, P.S. & Lindstaedt, B. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 10, 239–249 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Gibbs, K.D. Jr., McGready, J., Bennett, J.C. & Griffin, K. PLoS One 9, e114736 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pallier, G. Sex Roles 48, 265–276 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Steinmayr, R. & Spinath, B. Sex Roles 61, 736–749 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Furnham, A. et al. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 36, 417–440 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Bengtsson, C. et al. Econ. Lett. 86, 199–203 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Correll, S.J. Am. J. Sociol. 106, 1691–1730 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The author is grateful for helpful comments from Joan Smith, Jackie Giovanniello, and Christine Scaduto.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason M Sheltzer.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author is an independent fellow at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Methods (PDF 76 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sheltzer, J. Gender disparities among independent fellows in biomedical research. Nat Biotechnol 36, 1018–1021 (2018).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing