Women Less Likely to Apply for Grants When Topics Don't Match Their Interests

Overview

Paper Summary › Explain Like I'm Five › Conflicts of Interest › Identified Limitations › Rating Explanation › Good to know › Topic Hierarchy › File Information ›

Paper Summary

Paperzilla title

Female scientists are less likely to apply for research grants when the topics are less aligned with their research interests. This topic proximity fully mediates the gender gap in application rates, meaning that gender itself doesn't directly affect application rates once topic alignment is considered. Additionally, men seem to be more responsive to changes in topic proximity than women, suggesting differing sensitivities to topic alignment in application decisions.

Explain Like I'm Five

Scientists found that girl scientists might not ask for money for their projects if the ideas aren't about things they really love. This is why sometimes fewer girls apply for science money.

Possible Conflicts of Interest

The authors acknowledge funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (G-2021-14189) for one of the authors, Chiara Franzoni. While this could present a potential conflict depending on the foundation's interests, the study's focus on gender disparities in grant applications and its methodological approach do not appear to directly align with any obvious bias stemming from this funding source. No other conflicts were identified.

Identified Limitations

Limited Generalizability

The study acknowledges limitations due to its focus on a single funding agency in Sweden, raising questions about the generalizability of findings to other contexts and countries. Replicating the study across diverse samples is crucial to determine wider applicability.

Potential Endogeneity

The study acknowledges potential endogeneity from uncontrolled variables, most notably the career rank of scientists. While controlling for various factors, the absence of specific rank data (e.g., Post-doc, Professor) may confound results, especially in the baseline model and tests related to masculine language.

Sequential Ignorability Assumption

The mediation analysis assumes sequential ignorability (uncorrelated error terms between mediator and outcome models). While a sensitivity analysis suggests robustness up to a 20% correlation, the potential for unobserved confounders influencing both proximity and application probability remains.

Focus on Mission-Oriented Calls

The study focuses on mission-oriented calls, where research topics are predetermined. This limits insights into gender dynamics in investigator-initiated grant applications, where researchers choose their own topics.

Rating Explanation

This study offers valuable empirical insights into a less-explored aspect of the gender gap in research funding: application rates. The use of a unique dataset and innovative methodology to define potential applicants makes a significant contribution. While the limitations regarding generalizability and potential endogeneity are acknowledged, the sensitivity analyses and robust findings around topic proximity provide strong support for the conclusions. The rating of 4 reflects the study's strengths while acknowledging the need for further research to address the remaining limitations and broaden the scope of investigation.

Good to know

This is the Starter analysis. Paperzilla Pro fact-checks every citation, researches author backgrounds and funding sources, and uses advanced AI reasoning for more thorough insights.

Explore Pro →

Topic Hierarchy

Domain: Social Sciences

Field: Social Sciences

Subfield: Gender Studies

File Information

Original Title: Topic choice, gendered language, and the under-funding of female scholars in mission-oriented research

Uploaded: July 14, 2025 at 05:07 PM

Privacy: Public