ArticleJournal of the history of biology2025
The Different Career Patterns of Two Pathbreaking Women Biologists at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Article in Journal of the history of biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article analyzes the different career patterns of Naomi Feinbrun, a botanist, and Elisheva Goldschmidt, a geneticist, both of whom began their PhD studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the 1930s, and were among the first women to receive professorships at the same university. Although Feinbrun experienced early career obstacles, she encountered less opposition while on the higher rungs of the academic ladder. In contrast, Goldschmidt, who operated according to a much more ambitious and competitive pattern than Feinbrun, did not suffer significant barriers at the beginning of her academic career, but encountered hurdles at a later stage. This article offers a close, comparative analysis of their careers, so that the distinctions and specificities of early and late career obstacles become clear. It argues that by paying attention to the intersectionality of gender with other categories like social and cultural backgrounds as well as personal characteristics, a complex picture emerges that moves beyond traditional gender-based sociological explanations that draw on the metaphors of "glass ceiling" and "sticky floor." As the article shows, furthermore, even women scientists who belonged to similar disciplines in the same university and were active in the same time period, could face quite different challenges. Such comparative studies on the career patterns of women scientists might offer new possibilities for the many historical challenges faced by women scientists in various global contexts.
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.