We must eliminate bias against researchers who stay put

Marking down fellowship applicants for being unwilling to move institutions can be deeply unfair, say Trisha Greenhalgh and Ed Hawkins

Published on
August 1, 2019
Last updated
March 4, 2020
caryatids Greek statues
Source: Getty

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (3)

This article is so biased. What it describes apply only to hiring practices in a few elite UK and US institutions. In many academic systems (Italy, Germany etc) inbreeding is pervasive. The only way to get a job is often to get a job at the same institution where one has done their PhD, or in one where the PhD supervisor has connections. In a lot of the academic world, applications by "external" are automatically disregarded. The "centrifugal bias" the authors talk about is a way a few elite institutions try to fight inbreeding and make sure that they hire talented and committed candidates, rather than those who own their position to the support of "[a] stable research ‘family’” (read: a powerful patron).
As well as being as indirectly discriminating against women, centrifugal bias also indirectly discriminates against disabled applicants who may be unable to travel internationally (some countries will not even issue visas if you will "place too much pressure on the health or social care system") or even within country (since transferring between hospitals and doctors can be extremely disruptive.) It seems to me that it could be argued that this sort of policy is actually discriminatory since it indirectly discriminates against members of at least two protected groups (gender and disability.)
The problem, in the example given of Amanda, the researcher who is not willing to change institutions, is about the practice of hiring two members of the same family as academics - husband and wife, or father and daughter. The stable research 'family', isn't just that, it has literally become a research family, whether stable or not, a university engaging in nepotism, which hardly an acceptable way to conduct a hiring. If the reluctant researcher hasn't had a chance yet to experience the risks of moving day, maybe she should, to get over that fear. The article doesn't say whether she teaches or just does research. But one issue that is not mentioned is the effect on students, often international students, who might just know more about life than their teacher. If she is not willing to try living in another country, or at least a different city, is she really suitable to teach, if she decided to at a later date. It is a fact that "different people flourish in different circumstances", but how do they know how far they can extend themselves if they don't try. It's a university, not a safe haven for employees to feel secure in.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT