Risk-Taking Younger Siblings and Women in Science?
I have been giving some thought to risk-taking behavior for men and women in science and so an article in New York Times science section for Tuesday, May 25 caught my attention. It was called "Sibling Risk Taking in the Big Leagues." Okay, yes, it's about baseball, but bear with me. The study compared younger and older siblings who both played major league baseball. Because baseball compulsively collects data about itself, the researchers found multiple sets of brothers with differences favoring the younger brother in base-stealing. Alan Schwartz quoted the study, published in Personality and Social Psychology Review, that for more than 90 percent of the sibling pairs, the younger brother stole bases more than the older brother. Schartz commented that the behavior might have originated in competition for food, but now it was more about competing for parental attention.
So what does all this have to say about women in science? Maybe nothing, but I believe women in science are like the younger siblings. As a tendency more than an absolute prediction, I suspect that the average woman in science is more willing to pursue a risky but potentially earth-shaking project than a man. I am not willing to say it's an attention-getting or competitive move in this case. But It could be that taking a risky project and pulling it off is one of the few ways women are comfortable with saying, "Look at me! I can do this, and do it well!" It's also possible that women take these risky projects because they don't feel the pressure of in-group evaluation the same way men do, since they may not be part of the old boy club to begin with. A third possible contributing factor could be that women have been pulled into science by the beauty of the problems and they rate a problem's aesthetic appeal much higher than its potential risk in choosing to work on it personally.
I would love to know what you think about these musings:
A No correlation between risky problems and female scientists
B I think women do often choose risky projects but I don't know why
C. I think it could be that taking a risky project and making it work is a way for woman scientist to court attention
Hi Helen,
I love your comment "I don't like incremental science." I don't either. I'd rather upset the apple cart, because then I get to rearrange all the apples.
cheers,
Laura
B. I choose risky projects because I don't like incremental sciences. And you're right, the aesthetics for me are important which is why I do imaging. I can't say it's attention getting though. Perhaps a quality of the kind of women attracted to science as you say.
Do note Phoebe at AWIS's comment, under another topic, saying that she couldn't take on high risk projects because her mentees (grad students and post docs) were few and not the most creative possible, in most cases. She attributes that to choices for male mentors, by most of those in training. I'm very interested to hear if others have experienced this trend or know of any study of it.
cheers,
Laura
It's not so important to me to be noticed. My administration notices me. If I publish something every three or four years with my student coauthors it's just fine. No need to try to get it in Science or Nature. I just wish people doing undergrad research got a little more respect from NSF and NIH. My last two proposals to NIH were triaged and never even reviewed. Luckily,I can get small grants from my home institution.
Small Science Woman
I'd rather show than tell. I would do a hundred risky experiments and hope they worked before I would send one CV to a male colleague unless he asked for it first.
Even if you think this idea of mine is far out, I'd be interested to hear what you feel willing and able to do in order to get other scientists to notice what you've done. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with taking a risk. Would you send a male colleague a CV or a summary of your recent accomplishments when you hear he is on a committee to set up a symposium?
cheers,
Laura
