ArticleCBE life sciences education2024
Disrupting the Master Narrative in Academic Biology as LGBTQ+ Ph.D. Students: Learning, Teaching, and Conducting Research.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2024. 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.
- LGBTQ+ Realities in the Biological Sciences.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
- Beyond disability: how being twice-marginalized shapes the experiences of STEM undergraduates with disabilities.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Embedded Gatekeeping, Comparativeness, and Hidden Curriculum Create Feelings of Impostorism for Biology Doctoral Students.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
- Community College Transfer Students' Pathways Through Boundary Experiences Using a Storied Science Identity Lens.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
- The Experiences of Students with Concealable Muslim Identities During Peer Interactions in Undergraduate Biology Courses.CBE life sciences education · 2025Article
- Nine Undergraduate Biology Instructors Revealing their LGBTQ+ Identities in Class Resulted in Benefits for their LGBTQ+ Students and Students with Other Marginalized Identities.CBE life sciences education · 2025Article
- National randomized experimental study finds no evidence of undergraduate bias against LGB biology instructors, even in LGB-unfriendly states.Bioscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
LGBTQ+ individuals face discrimination and stigma in academic biology. These challenges are likely magnified for graduate students. However, there have been no studies documenting the experiences of LGBTQ+ life sciences graduate students. To address this gap, we conducted an interview study of 22 biology PhD students from 13 universities across the United States who identify as LGBTQ+. We used the master narrative framework to interpret our findings. Master narratives are guidelines that dictate the "expected" and "normal" way one is supposed to navigate life. We considered how graduate students engage with the societal master narrative that treats cisheterosexuality as the norm, as well as the master narrative that expects biology to remain an objective, apolitical space. We found that LGBTQ+ PhD students recognize the anti-LBGTQ+ narratives in academic biology, which can result in instances of discrimination and encourage them to conceal their identities. However, participants pushed back against these master narratives. Graduate students described creating alternative narratives by highlighting how their LGBTQ+ identity has allowed them to become more inclusive instructors and better researchers. Some also purposely reveal their LGBTQ+ identity in academic biology, violating the master narrative that non-science identities should not be discussed in the life sciences.
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.