New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Scientist Encourages Other Women Scientists to Make Themselves Heard

Geneticist Natalie Telis noticed few women asking questions at scientific conferences. So she publicized the problem and set about to make a change. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Poster session at a scientific conference.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If you attend science conferences, ever pay attention to who in the audience asks questions? Geneticist Natalie Telis did. And she noticed something ... off. "For the entire first day of the conference, I was the only woman to ask a question. And I thought, wow, that's kind of weird, right?" 

So, being a scientist, she decided to systematically study who asks questions at scientific conferences. Together with colleagues from Stanford University, where she was based at the time, and Emory University in Atlanta, she recorded more than 2,000 questions from hundreds of talks at eight different scientific conferences.

After assigning either male or female designations to question askers—which the researchers acknowledge in the paper doesn't fully capture the spectrum of gender identity—they found that women ask far fewer questions than a representative result based on their numbers. In fact: "You need about 85 to 90 percent of your room to be women before 50 percent of your questions come from women." 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But Telis did identify a possible solution. Halfway through the Biology of Genomes conference in 2015, Telis started tweeting some of her preliminary findings about how few women had been asking questions compared to their relative numbers at the meeting. That information sparked a public discussion—and a policy change from the conference organizers, who instituted a rule that the first question at every talk had to come from a scientist still working towards her PhD, in the hope that the approach would produce a more diverse set of question-askers. And it worked. 

"Before our intervention, about 11 percent of questions came from women, which is one third of what you'd expect. After our intervention, you get more like 35 percent of questions coming from women. It's actually what you'd expect from that audience." 

The analysis is in the American Journal of Human Genetics. [Natalie Telis et al., Public Discussion Affects Question Asking at Academic Conferences]

Telis says that strategy of simply publicizing the problem has been effective at other conferences too, getting more women to not only attend, but to participate in scientific conferences.

"A lot of women have messaged me and said, 'Oh, you know, I asked my first question at a conference when I saw this work,' or stuff like that. And I hope that means people are taking advantage of that incredible opportunity to really add their voice, not just their face in the conference photo, to that scientific community."

—Christopher Intagliata 

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe