The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science

Abstract

Prior work finds a diversity paradox: Diversity breeds innovation, yet underrepresented groups that diversify organizations have less successful careers within them. Does the diversity paradox hold for scientists as well? We study this by utilizing a near-complete population of ∼1.2 million US doctoral recipients from 1977 to 2015 and following their careers into publishing and faculty positions. We use text analysis and machine learning to answer a series of questions: How do we detect scientific innovations? Are underrepresented groups more likely to generate scientific innovations? And are the innovations of underrepresented groups adopted and rewarded? Our analyses show that underrepresented groups produce higher rates of scientific novelty. However, their novel contributions are devalued and discounted: For example, novel contributions by gender and racial minorities are taken up by other scholars at lower rates than novel contributions by gender and racial majorities, and equally impactful contributions of gender and racial minorities are less likely to result in successful scientific careers than for majority groups. These results suggest there may be unwarranted reproduction of stratification in academic careers that discounts diversity's role in innovation and partly explains the underrepresentation of some groups in academia.

Cite this

Bas Hofstra, Vivek Kulkarni, Sebastian Munoz-Najar Galvez, Bryan Dawei He, Dan Jurafsky, Daniel A. McFarland (2020). The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915378117

@article{bas2020the,
  title  = {The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science},
  author = {Hofstra, Bas and Kulkarni, Vivek and Galvez, Sebastian Munoz-Najar and He, Bryan Dawei and Jurafsky, Dan and McFarland, Daniel A.},
  year   = {2020},
  journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences},
  doi    = {10.1073/pnas.1915378117}
}

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 985 citations exist upstream.

References

Cited by