When women researchers publish, media attention doesn’t always follow

From ScienceMag:

Media coverage can give scientists a powerful career boost, raising their visibility and signaling that their work matters beyond the lab. But a new study finds that benefit goes disproportionately to men, potentially widening existing gender gaps and shaping public perceptions of who counts as a researcher. In an analysis of 1.2 million news stories about scholarly research, men-led papers were found to receive more attention overall and were heavily overrepresented in the top 5% of most covered studies. Women-led papers, on the other hand, clustered at the bottom.

“News media sit at a crucial gateway,” says senior author Chaoqun Ni of the University of Wisconsin–Madison. “If coverage systematically tilts toward some groups over others, that doesn’t just affect individual careers—it can reinforce stereotypes about who ‘looks like’ a scientist.”

Ni and colleagues searched for English-language news coverage of more than 1 million papers with U.S.-based corresponding authors published between 2018 and 2022 in highly media-cited journals; broadcast coverage, such as TV and radio, and blogs were excluded. Overall, only about one in eight of the papers—which spanned STEM, social sciences, and the humanities—received any media attention at all, the authors reported in a paper published in Science Communication in August. Of the 129,000 studies that did garner coverage, men-led papers were on average highlighted in more outlets than women-led ones. To classify gender, the authors used a computational tool based on names—a widely accepted but imperfect method, particularly for non-Western names.

A paradox also emerged across fields in terms of whether a study was covered at all. In male-dominated areas such as economics and business, women-led work was slightly more likely to be covered than expected. But in fields nearer gender parity—public health and social sciences—women-led papers were less likely to make the news. The authors compared media coverage with the real gender balance in each field—for example, if only one-quarter of the papers in a field were led by women, that was the baseline for judging under- or overrepresentation.

“Women often ‘outperform’ in fields where they are least represented, whether in citations or grants,” says Cassidy Sugimoto, an information scientist at the Georgia Institute of Technology, who was not involved in the new study. What stood out to her was the scale and nature of the skew. Women-led papers were more likely to be featured in local outlets than in national, international, or science-specialty media. They appeared more often in liberal-leaning outlets than conservative ones. And coverage of their work carried a more negative tone. “When women’s research is politicized or framed negatively, it risks eroding the perceived credibility of women scientists,” Sugimoto says.

The study doesn’t investigate possible mechanisms underlying the results. But multiple steps along the publicity pipeline could be at play, as well as broader structural imbalances. News coverage often reflects what universities and journals promote through press releases to the media, notes Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch. “If men are more likely to request press releases, that could tilt the pool.” High-profile journals—which often publish papers that warrant news coverage, and are more likely to have the resources to promote those papers to the media—also tend to have disproportionately male corresponding authors, says Priyanka Runwal, an associate editor at Chemical & Engineering News.

A first media mention can also open the gate for a researcher, says Yong-Yeol Ahn, a data science researcher at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. Who reporters can reach for interviews—and whether authors agree to talk—can determine whether an initial mention snowballs into high-visibility coverage. “Small biases can compound as attention spreads,” he says.

Even when reporters work hard to talk to women researchers, some hesitate to agree, Runwal says. One study found women were more likely than men to cite harassment, appearance-based comments, or lack of confidence as barriers to interviews. This echoes Oransky’s concerns. “Are men more able to answer journalist calls? Are they getting snappier quotes that journalists love?”

Scientists can help shape coverage, Runwal says. “If it’s a field I regularly cover, I often ask researchers to keep me in the loop about upcoming publications,” she says. For women especially, who may hesitate to speak on sensitive topics, she suggests opening a dialogue with reporters about concerns such as backlash or harassment. “You can always ask questions, set boundaries, and if you’re not convinced, decline to go on the record.”

Read More