ArticleHigher education2023
LGBT + academics' and PhD students' experiences of visibility in STEM: more than raising the rainbow flag.
Article in Higher education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- National randomized experimental study finds no evidence of undergraduate bias against LGB biology instructors, even in LGB-unfriendly states.Bioscience · 2025Article
- Self-transitioning or other-transitioning? The positive effects of LGBTQ + college students' positive coping and perceived academic support.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- Perspectives on inclusion, safety, and belonging from members of the North American LGBTQIA+ conservation community.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2024Article
- Disrupting the Master Narrative in Academic Biology as LGBTQ+ Ph.D. Students: Learning, Teaching, and Conducting Research.CBE life sciences education · 2024Article
- Enhancing visibility and inclusivity of queer scientists to advance equality in academia.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Experiences of LGBTQ+ graduate students in research-focused doctoral programs: a scoping review.Frontiers in education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT +) individuals in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) are still understudied and, despite some improvements, are still characterised by patterns of exclusion, disadvantage, and discrimination. In this article, we explore how visibility is perceived and navigated by LGBT + academics and PhD students in STEM, with a focus on the ways that interlocking systems of oppression impact people and groups who are marginalised and historically excluded. This article draws on a broader research project about the experiences of women and LGBT + people in STEM that was conducted between 2019 and 2020 at a UK university and is framed by intersectionality theory. Based on the thematic analysis of interviews and focus groups with 24 LGBT + participants, findings suggest that visibility is still a risk for LGBT + academics and PhD students in STEM. We found that the labour of navigating visibility was perceived as an unfair disadvantage and that the focus on individuals' visibility in the absence of meaningful and transformative inclusion initiatives by higher education institutions was regarded as tokenistic. The article argues that addressing LGBT + visibility should firstly be an institutional responsibility and not an individual burden and that this work is essential to set the conditions for personal visibility to happen by choice, safely and without retribution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.