Paper detail

Asking gender questions: Results from a survey of gender and question asking among UK Astronomers at NAM2014

We report on a survey of astronomers asking questions at the most recent National Astronomy Meeting (NAM2014). The gender balance of both speakers and session chairs at NAM (31% and 29% women respectively) closely matched that of attendees (28% female). However, we find that women were under-represented among question askers (just 18% female). Women were especially under-represented in asking the first question (only 14% of first questions asked by women), but when the Q&A session reached four or more questions, women and men were observed to ask roughly equal numbers of questions. We found a small, but statistically insignificant, increase in the fraction of questions from women in sessions where the chair was also female. On average $2.2\pm0.1$ questions were asked per talk, with no detectable difference in the number of questions asked of female and male speakers, but on average female chairs solicited slightly fewer questions than male chairs. We compare these results to a similar study by Davenport et al. (2014) for the AAS, who also found under-representation of women amongst question askers, but saw more pronounced gender effects when a session chair or speaker were female. We conclude with suggestions for improving the balance of questions at future astronomy meetings.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.