Did you know that both men and women judge research papers by men to be stronger than those by women? Or that both men and women would rather have male authors as possible future collaborators in academic papers?

Associate Professor at the Department of Gender and Sexualities, Prof. Brenda Murphy spoke to Newspoint about this stark reality, ahead of Women’s Day on 8 March.

Quoting an article issued by Smithsonian Magazine in 2019, Prof. Murphy said that women’s subordinate place throughout history in science has made them invisible to even historians who dedicated their life to recording scientific achievements.

She mentioned the work of Margaret Rossiter, who at 24 years old, was one of the few women enrolled in Yale’s graduate program devoted to the history of science. She dedicated her life to recounting the history of women in science. Her study, called Women Scientists in America, managed to bring many outstanding stories to light.

The Matilda Effect would then become known as that bias that acknowledges the achievements of women scientists whose work is attributed to a male colleague.

The Gender Social Norms Index, another study quoted by Prof. Murphy, found that almost 90% of men and women hold some sort of bias against females.

The NGO Mediating Women, Balancing the Media, set up by Prof. Murphy herself, actively takes part in media research projects and attempts to educate media organisations to generate balanced media content.