Examining Cultural Structures and Functions in Biology

Author:

Tanner Richelle L1ORCID,Grover Neena2,Anderson Michelle L3,Crocker Katherine C4,Dutta Shuchismita5,Horner Angela M6,Hough Loren E7,Moore Talia Y8ORCID,Rosen Gail L9,S Whitney Kaitlin10,Summers Adam P11

Affiliation:

1. Department of Animal Science, University of California at Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA

2. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Colorado College, Colorado Springs, CO 80903, USA

3. Department of Biology, The University of Montana Western, Dillon, MT 59725, USA

4. Genetics Department, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10461, USA

5. RCSB Protein Data Bank, Institute for Quantitative Biomedicine, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08854, USA

6. Department of Biology, California State University San Bernardino, San Bernardino, CA 92407, USA

7. Department of Physics, BioFrontiers Institute, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309, USA

8. Mechanical Engineering, Robotics Institute, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

9. Ecological & Evolutionary Signal Processing & Informatics Lab, Center for Biological Discovery from Big Data, Electrical, and Computer Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

10. Science, Technology, & Society Department, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA

11. Friday Harbor Laboratories, University of Washington, Friday Harbor, WA 98250, USA

Abstract

Synopsis Scientific culture and structure organize biological sciences in many ways. We make choices concerning the systems and questions we study. Our research then amplifies these choices into factors that influence the directions of future research by shaping our hypotheses, data analyses, interpretation, publication venues, and dissemination via other methods. But our choices are shaped by more than objective curiosity—we are influenced by cultural paradigms reinforced by societal upbringing and scientific indoctrination during training. This extends to the systems and data that we consider to be ethically obtainable or available for study, and who is considered qualified to do research, ask questions, and communicate about research. It is also influenced by the profitability of concepts like open-access—a system designed to improve equity, but which enacts gatekeeping in unintended but foreseeable ways. Creating truly integrative biology programs will require more than intentionally developing departments or institutes that allow overlapping expertise in two or more subfields of biology. Interdisciplinary work requires the expertise of large and diverse teams of scientists working together—this is impossible without an authentic commitment to addressing, not denying, racism when practiced by individuals, institutions, and cultural aspects of academic science. We have identified starting points for remedying how our field has discouraged and caused harm, but we acknowledge there is a long path forward. This path must be paved with field-wide solutions and institutional buy-in: our solutions must match the scale of the problem. Together, we can integrate—not reintegrate—the nuances of biology into our field.

Funder

National Science Foundation

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Plant Science,Animal Science and Zoology

Reference136 articles.

1. Philosophical bias is the one bias that science cannot avoid;Andersen;Elife,2019

2. Racial/ethnic differences in physician distrust in the United States;Armstrong;Am J Public Health,2007

3. Enhancing skills of academic researchers: the development of a participatory threefold peer learning model;Barnard;Innov Educ Teach Int,2019

4. Understanding social constructions of becoming an academic through women’s collective career narratives;Barnard;Journal of Further and Higher Education,2021

5. Internationally mobile academics: hierarchies, hegemony, and the geo-scientific imagination;Bauder;Geoforum,2018

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3