Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    SciTechDaily
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Earth
    • Health
    • Physics
    • Science
    • Space
    • Technology
    Facebook X (Twitter) Pinterest YouTube RSS
    SciTechDaily
    Home»Science»Experts Say Nobel Prize Lacks Diversity – Again
    Science

    Experts Say Nobel Prize Lacks Diversity – Again

    By Jeff Falk, Rice UniversityOctober 21, 20191 Comment3 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Reddit
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Telegram Email Reddit

    Nobel Prize Medal

    Each October, the Nobel Prizes are an opportunity to celebrate science. Unfortunately, this year’s prizes once again underscored a lack of diversity among the winners, according to experts in the Center for Health and Biosciences at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.

    “Representation at science’s highest ranks matters,” wrote co-authors Kenneth Evans, scholar in science and technology policy; Kirstin Matthews, fellow in science and technology policy; and Daniel Moralí, research associate, in a new post for the Baker Institute blog.

    “Education research demonstrates that young scientists from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, both male and female, are more likely to succeed when they develop an identity as a scientist,” the authors wrote. “A sense of scientist identity is far easier to build with a more diverse population of scientific mentors and national and international leaders. This year’s all-male prize pool (in the sciences) is both an ugly reflection of a deeply rooted racial and gender bias in the scientific community, and also of the Nobel’s archaic rule system. It is time to remake the Nobel Prize or leave it behind.”

    In 2018, after decades of “omissions, implicit bias and outright misogyny,” academia’s biggest prize felt like it finally entered the 21st century, the experts said. “In the days leading up to the Nobel Prize announcement, the Academy (which administers the prizes) acknowledged the glaring gender imbalance in its prize pool and outlined changes to its awarding procedures meant to build a more inclusive body of nominators and nominees,” the authors wrote. “Then, for the second time in the Nobel’s nearly 120-year history, two women, Donna Strickland (physics) and Frances Arnold (chemistry), were recognized in the same year. Strickland was the first woman to win the physics prize in 55 years.”

    Unfortunately, the 2019 prizes were a return to the status quo: All nine laureates in the sciences — physics, chemistry and medicine — went to men. Since the inaugural prize in 1901, the total number of female laureates now stands at three in physics, five in chemistry and 12 in medicine, out of 616 total recipients in the sciences, or 3.2% of the prize share (2.7% when fractional counting is taken into account).

    “Concrete policy changes are needed to ensure more diversity is reflected in the world’s most visible and prestigious scientific honor,” the authors wrote. “Until it changes, the scientific community owes it to the public to stop upholding the Nobel’s dated and exclusionary prestige, and the myth of lone, male genius it represents.”

    Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
    Follow us on Google and Google News.

    Diversity Nobel Prize Rice University
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Email Reddit

    Related Articles

    Carbon Nanotubes Grown on Old Newspapers

    Study Finds Political Conservatives Make the Best Investors

    Scientists Toughening Graphene by Integrating Carbon Nanotubes

    Rice Scientists Make Polymers with Light-Triggered Nanoparticles

    New Technique Dramatically Cuts Production Time of Nanotube Fibers

    Researchers Optimize Nanomaterials for Fuel-Cell Cathodes

    Contact Effects Could Limit How Small a Nano Device Can Be

    Graphene Oxide Layers Deform Evenly Under Gentle Strain

    Scientists Develop a New Class of Superhydrophobic Nanomaterials

    1 Comment

    1. Geoff on October 22, 2019 2:08 am

      That’s because men are the inventors isn’t it? It’s always been that way. Women just don’t have the same brain functions as men. Name me one woman who has invented or discovered anything fundamental in science/engineering. Please don’t bring up Madame Curie as an “example.” Recognise it and move on.

      Reply
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • YouTube

    Don't Miss a Discovery

    Subscribe for the Latest in Science & Tech!

    Trending News

    Tea or Coffee? Your Daily Choice Could Affect Osteoporosis Risk

    Vitamin C May Fight Cancer in a Surprising Way

    Hidden Earthquake Threat: Oregon’s Fault May Be Closer to the Surface Than Scientists Thought

    Scientists Discover Hidden Sleep Switch That Boosts Brainpower, Builds Muscle, and Burns Fat

    Ancient Mega-Floods Once Ripped Across Mars and Left This Giant Scar

    Scientists Discover Cheap, Natural Remedy for High Blood Pressure

    Earth’s Upper Atmosphere Is Cooling Fast and Scientists Finally Know Why

    32,000 Olympic Pools of Magma Nearly Erupted Beneath Atlantic Island

    Follow SciTechDaily
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Pinterest
    • Newsletter
    • RSS
    SciTech News
    • Biology News
    • Chemistry News
    • Earth News
    • Health News
    • Physics News
    • Science News
    • Space News
    • Technology News
    Recent Posts
    • New AI Blood Test Predicts Stroke, Heart Failure, and More up to 15 Years in Advance
    • The Secret to Living Past 100 May Be Hidden in Your Blood
    • Ancient Roman Gold Mines Discovered in Spain’s Pyrenees
    • Ancient DNA Reveals How Farming Spread and Nearly Broke a Civilization
    • 146,000-Year-Old Discovery Rewrites the Story of Human Creativity
    Copyright © 1998 - 2026 SciTechDaily. All Rights Reserved.
    • Science News
    • About
    • Contact
    • Editorial Board
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.