Kristie

1
Introduction
Without our brains, there would be no music, beauty, poetry, or
science, explained Kathleen Taylor, a computational neuroscientist
poetically as she carries on writing about that human brain are more
than pieces of meat that allows every one of the human race to
become the person that they are now, in her 2012 book, The Brain
Supremacy.
The science of the brain, or in a more precise scientific
terminology, Neuroscience, has been receiving huge hype for in
popular culture and mainstream media. Yet, it is still difficult for
scientists and researcher in its own field to establish actual research
and study of the brain. Not to mention other limitations such as
limited

funding,

budget

cutbacks,

and

under

appreciated

acceptance by the public and the government, that has restrained

neuroscientist from exploring and publishing their researches.
Despite the struggle, brave and determined frontiers in brain
science never backed down and now are rapidly increasing as a new
breed of scientists, who are now creating careful observation and
painstaking illustration of the conundrum of the human brain and
behavior.
Ever since the 1960s, the work dynamic for men and women in
neuroscience

have

advanced

and

expanded

remarkably.

Neuroscience can appear to be female dominated at a glance; yet,

male neuroscientists received more public acclamation and awards.
Additionally, there is a considerable gap between the number of

Kristie
2
men and women in the field pertaining to a specific topic in the
array

categories

overtime.

These

categories

include

cultural

expectations, education, employment, ranks, research regulations,

specialized organizations, and awards.

The Past: 1960 1970

Neuroscience, both the field and the terminology was never
invented until November 22 1950, when the National Institute on
Disease and Blindness changed their name to National Institute on
Neurological Disease and Stroke1. Scattered under the department
of either psychology, medicine, or biochemistry, what used to be
called neuroscience were the studies specifically on the brain, the
nervous system and behavior. This postwar era itself lead America
to the expansion of science, application and practice of psychology.
The trend continued through the decade of 1960 and was joined by
a new interest in new public policy issues.
Cultural Expectations
Family and social upbringing cast men and women to different roles.
Besides being expected to be well adjusted, American women
were

also

being

warned

to

adapt

postwar

adjustments

of

contributing to the nations defense2, not only in the military sense,

but also in a more innovative and scientific sense. Family values
1 Warren Street. Chronology of Events in American Psychology.
Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1994, 230.
2 Rossiter, Margaret W. Women Scientists in America: Before
Affirmative Action (1940-1972). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1982, 50.

Kristie
3
eventually changed, it was moderately acceptable for young women
to withdraw from raising a family and staying in a household, and
pursue scientific careers of their choice. Families that do support
their female members career decision realize that the high demand
for female scientists could bring more financial support and equality
to the table.3 In the effort of encouraging young women in health
fields other than nursing, the National Science Foundation (NSF)
released new bulletins4, amongst those are the Careers for Women
in the Physical Sciences (1960) and Careers for Women in the
Biological Sciences (1961). Women were found to most likely be
pursuing science careers in the social sciences (compassionate/soft
science), while men were more dominant in natural or physical
science fields (hard/dispassionate sciences). Under the division of
biology with aspects of psychology at that time, neuroscience
reserves as a bridge for social sciences and physical sciences. At
this time, women scientists approached neuroscience as the best of
both worlds5. But, men were found to be more prominent as
neuroscientists as to their fellow female colleagues due to the
gender restriction to become published as a primary researcher in a
published research.6
Education
3 Goertzel, Mildred George, Victor Goertzel, and Ted George
Goertzel. Cradles of Eminence. Boston: Little, Brown and Company,
1962.
4 Rossiter 66.
5 Joyce Tang. Scientific Pioneers: Women Succeeding in Science.
Lanham: University Press of America, 2006, 27.
6 Rossiter 53.

Kristie
4
Since a specific department for neuroscience itself hasnt been
established as a professional scientific major, graduate research in
any field pertaining a neuroscientific course such as biosciences,
medical sciences, psychology is required for continuing research
work and teaching. When a scientist has reached the doctoral
degree, they can finally be called a specialized scientist. As seen in
multiple articles from the New York Times, neuroscience was given
the terms study of nervous system 7 and brain study8. Following
NSFs scouting attempt to recruit more women scientists, the
National Defense Education Act (NDEA) granted funding for young
scientists in the undergraduate level, both men and women.
Nevertheless, in the first year of the NSF distributing grants in the
1960, women scientists only constituted 11.99 percent of the entire
fund recipients.9 In the field of biosciences, 22.69 percent female
scientists were granted the aid in total. While in psychology, 30.77
percent female scientists in total.10
Once the NDEA fellows reach graduate school, their attrition rate
was even higher, as the Wall Street Journal had feared. Of the
45,829 NDEA fellows given awards between 1959 and 1973, only
19,998 (43.6 percent from total) had completed their doctorates by
1974. More strikingly, there was an extensive differences by gender
7 Robert Reinhold, Scientists Tackle Mystery of Brain. New York
Times, 30 December 1968, column 4, 20.
8 Brain Study Planned, Trustees at U. of Rochester Back Research
Center. New York Times, 9 December 1969, 24.
9 Harmon, Lindsey R. Career Achievements of the National Defense
Education Act (title IV) Fellows of 1959-1973. A Report to the U.S.
Office of Education. 1977, 7+10.
10 Refer to table A. 1 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages

Kristie
5
and field. Among the 40,166 fellows between 1963 and 1973 only,
the 57.9 percent of men graduated biosciences, while women had
27.8 percent graduates (from the total of undergraduate fellows
they received). In psychology, 53.4 percent of men finished their
doctorates, while 31.1 percent women completed theirs.11
To infer the data available on the women who did not complete
their degrees, compared to men, they were accepted at fewer
institutions, fewer fields neutral for the women, and fewer
professors or mentors were willing to accept them. Not to mention,
the pressure to be married and urge for childcare overwhelmed
more of the female scientists more than the male. This is also
quantitatively evident in the data in Earned Degrees Conferred by
Higher

Educational

Institutions,

published

by

the

USOE

and

continued by the National Center for Educational Stastics in late

1960s and early 1970s.12
Employment
In 1960, there were only 7.21 percent female assistant professors
in total faculty in the psychology department in twenty leading
universities. Meanwhile, there were far less female assistant
professors in biochemistry, with only 4.93 percent in total.
Regarding full-time professorships, there were 2.72 percent female
full-time psychology professors and 1.79 percent female full-time
biochemistry professors.13 Until 1964, Most U.S universities would
11 Refer to table A. 2 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
12 Refer to table A. 3 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
13 John B. Parrish Papers, SLRC.

Kristie
6
not hire women as faculty until Passage of Civil Act rights prohibited
discrimination in education and employment based on sex. 14 This
attempt succeeded as a rise of women neuroscientists being
employed in educational institutions (47.35 percent employment in
1960 to 61.87 percent employment in 1970) and self-employment
(0.00 percent employment in 1960 to 2.71 percent employment in
1970),

but

experienced

decrease

in

employment

from

the

government and industrial sector.15

By 1970, women neuroscientists had its highest contribution in
consulting (15.68 percent as of total scientists) and teaching (13.29
percent) which is still far lower than the bigger proportion that male
neuroscientists have. Male neuroscientists had dominated the work
field, either in teaching, consulting, research, forecast/report,
production/inspection, management, and others.

16

Despite the small advances and attempts to reduce prejudices in

a professional scope, invisible discrimination still occurs, as female
neuroscientists are expected to have accomplished a minimum of
doctorate degree to even be considered as real neuroscientists,
while male neuroscientists can be hired in the same occupation with
only an undergraduate degree. As The Academic Marketplace author
Theodore Caplow had written:
Women tend to be discriminated against in the academic
profession, not because they have low prestige but because
14 Rossiter 107.
15 NSF, American Science Manpower, 1960-1970, 197+238.
16 NSF 79+239 .

Kristie
7
they are outside the prestige system entirely and for this
reason are of no use to a department in future recruitment.17
Ranks
At most universities in the 1960s had several ranks for research
personnel. Generally it was threefold: research fellow, for the recent
doctorate: research associate for longer-term personnel tied to a
particular project or faculty member; and senior research associate,
privileged and benefited researchers who have stayed for many
years and worked with distinction.18 Through 1964-1970 all over
America, 56-221 research associates were offered in the physics
department, but only 93-183 positions were offered in biological
sciences and 5-33 positions in psychology. 19 It was already a
struggle for both men and women neuroscientists to reach a
research rank, but even harder for the women. A 1966 survey at
Berkeley found that 23.92 percent of its research staff were women,
but then in 1970, a report on Berkeley added that compared with
male research staff, most of the women were ranked lower and paid
less even though they supervised more number of graduate
students than the men.

20

Salary-wise, in the field of psychology, men earned $15,500

annually while women earned $13,000 annually, in ratio of 83.87
percent to mens. Following the same trend in biological sciences,
17 Theodore Caplow. The Academic Marketplace. New York: Arno,
1958, pg 111
18 Rossiter 153.
19 NSF 106-7+171-72+189-90+202-3.
20 Report of the Subcommitee on the Status of Academic Women
on the Berkeley Campus Berkeley: JLP. May 1970, app. 15, 77-78

Kristie
8
men earned $15,500 annually while women earned $11,000
annually, in ratio of 70.97 percent to mens. This revealed the
sublimely hidden income inequality that women neuroscientists
were experiencing in early 1970.21
Fellowship-wise, from 1955-1969, there were only 21 women in
the 703 memberships in total offered in Center for Advanced Study
in the Behavioral Sciences (one of the field of studies in
neuroscience nowadays). The statistics shows that not even 3
percent of the total fellows were female, which means the majority
of 97 percent of the fellowship was received by males.22
Neuro-endocrinologist Hans Seyle wrote in a chapter Who Should
do Research? , that a rather capable female scientist will always be
blamed for wanting a little more authority and credit than her boss
or the system would allow her. She (female neuro-physiologists)
would be highly talented but underemployed and remain as a
member of a women-deprived faculty rank. He concluded that even
the best women in the field were blamed for presumed personality
defects.23 Only through marriage with a well-paid faculty member, a
female neuroscientist (and any other female scientists) could
become a research associate or even have their husbands title
combined as voluntary and the dual rank such as voluntary
research associate in neurobiologist (associate professor). 24
21 Refer to table A. 4 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
22 Refer to table A. 5 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
23 Hans Selye, From Dream to Discovery: On Being a Scientist. New
York: Arno, 1975, 25-26.
24 Rossiter 153.

Kristie
9
Research Regulations
The lack of support and resources to pursue scientific research in
neuroscience results in early departure or blocked mobility for both
men and women neuroscientists.

Even so, due to the height of

exposure for social issues, neuroscientists were drawn into learning

more towards social backgrounds of behavior, leaning more to pure
psychological science.

25

In a 1968 New York Times article26, President Nixon managed to

cut funds that were first intended for different scientific research
centers, including brain study and behavioral research centers.
Reallocated funds went to research handling atomic energies, laser
development, pollution impact and new computer technology. But,
there is a twist to the cut, President Nixon also wanted more
scientists and more research on the mentally-ill. This was a sign that
the

psychology

can

be

rerouted

back

as

branch

within

neuroscience.
In another staggering 1969 New York Times article27, it was stated
There is a growing fad among high school students to perform
heart transplants, brain surgery and other radical experiments on
animals. Among youngsters interested in science, this desire to
imitate

the

more

spectacular

work

being

done

by

mature

professionals on the far frontiers of science is understandable.

25 Street 226.
26 Homer Bigart. Nixon Scores Cuts in Science Funds. New York
Times. 6 October 1968, 74.
27 Radical Sciences Brought to Control. New York Times. 10 May
1969, 14.

Kristie
10
Following the previous information, Times added But it is a desire
that must be brought under control. In spite of all the past negative
approach towards neuroscience, in April of 1970, recorded by New
York Times, there was a great urge by neuroscientists to broaden
overly restrictive brain surgery rules.28 Supposedly, this movement
could lead therapeutic drugs and medicines business to a higher
profit, as proposed by the experts.
In addition to extension of the policy, technology funding boosted in
response to first modern computer development starting the 1970s,
creating greater improvements in neuroimaging and eventually the
development of in vivo imaging techniques enabled observation of
the learning brain, providing insights into the brains perceptual,
cognitive,

and

emotional

functions, with

clear relevance for

education. Finally in 1973, early computerized axial tomography

(CAT) scans and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) made the dream
of neuroscientists to visually discover brain mapping, came true.
Specialized Organizations
In 5th of September 1961, the organizing meeting of the APAs
reconstituted Division 6 (Physiological and Cognitive Psychology)
was held. The original Division 6 had merged with Division 3
(Theoretical-Experimental Psychology) but finally reconstituted itself
as a separate division29, creating room for psychologists who were
specifically involved with physiological and cognitive cases and were
28 V.A. Urged to Widen Brain Surgery Rules. New York Times. 5
April 1970, 55.
29 Street 261.

Kristie
11
able to introduce to brains function towards understanding behavior
and efficacy of treatment for more specific. This also prompt the
start of field specialization in psychology that led to neuroscience.
1969 was a big year for both male and female neuroscientists, it
was the year when an organization specialized for neuroscience-only
was officiated, the organizations name was The Society for
Neuroscience30. With 500 members in its inception, this gathering
momentum of neuroscience as a discipline, steered one of its
members, Horace W. Magoud, into collaborating with colleagues
Donald

B.

Lindsley

and

John

D.

French

and

successful

neuroscience program leading to establishment of the Brain

Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles in
the same year, which became the mecca for postdoctoral fellows
(both men and women) in neuroscience from all over the world.

31

Awards
There were no specific awards given yet for neuroscience in the
1960-1970. Apparently, the world of human brain and behavior has
not

been

recognized

as

prestigious

field

publically

and

professionally. There were achievement awards for the general

sciences such as the Guggenheim Awards, which in 1970 distributed
awards for specific science departments. Of the total 2,754 awards
given, only 113 women scientists were had received them. From
30 Milestones in Neuroscience Research University of Washington,
2013. 30 October 2014.
31 French, J. D.,D. B. Lindsley, and H. W. Magoun. An American
Contribution to Neuroscience: The Brain Research Institute. Los
Angeles: UCLA Publ. Serv., 1984.

Kristie
12
113, 7 can be found in psychology, 2 in medicine, 4 in biochemistry
and the most of 35 in the life sciences.

32

A very rare exception was

when Rita Levi-Montalcini became famous for her work in the 1960s
on nerve growth factor (NGF), and became a co-winner of the 1986
Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. She was the fourth woman to
receive this high honor, the path to which she described with
extreme modesty in her wonderful autobiography, In Praise of
Imperfection. Prior to presenting the work leading to her discovery
of NGF in St. Louis, Missouri, she wrote about how difficult and
unusual it was for a young woman growing up in the two world wars
to even consider a career in medicine, much less one in basic
laboratory science. Indeed, in 193033, when the 20-year-old future
Nobel Prize winner told her seemingly open-minded father that she
wanted to go into medicine, he ``objected that it was a long and
difficult course of study, unsuitable for a woman'' 34. Thankfully, he
did not prevent his daughter from pursuing her dream.

The Present
A new century has passed and finally neuroscience has reached it
peak with the uncanny attention it has gained from mainstream
media. Various books, movies, and shows suddenly incorporate any
neuroscience fact/method that their creators can find in order to
32 John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, Reports of the President
and Treasurer. New York: John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, 1970.
33 Levi-Montalicini, Rita. In Praise of Imperfection. New York: Basic
Books Inc., 1988, 37.
34 Levi-Montalcini 38.

Kristie
13
attract the growing audience that the neuroscientific field has
attracted. Still, it is a very strenuous, stressful and demanding
environment for budding neuroscientists to bear and accomplish in.
Cultural Expectations
A newly celebrated education and workforce sector called STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) has become a crucial
field in Americas innovative capacity and global competitiveness.
Better yet, neuroscience also a part of STEM. With that in mind,
American families have greatly evolved by now, overlooking gender
roles and chose to support children, girl or boy, to explore their
talent in scientific discovery and allowing them to pursue a scientific
career along the way.
In 2004, Scientific American even published the bimonthly
magazine concentrating on psychology, neuroscience, and related
fields. This magazine, the Scientific American Mind, focuses on
analyzing and showcasing breakthrough in these fields. With all the
neuroscientific aspect we see in popular culture, mainstream media,
and

even

advertisement,

friendlier

and

more

open

comprehension towards young scientist wanting to specifically be a

neuroscientist has begun. As well as public acceptance, there has
been higher professional demand than ever for medical field
involving

neuroscience

expertise,

especially

in

regenerative

medicines and artificial systems (intelligence, behavior, personality

and much more).

Kristie
14
Besides being a beneficiary in a growing field, a neuroscientist
would face intellectually engaging diverse range of faculties,
producing socially valuable work, and most likely to have job
stability in the long run. In the contrary, there are a few also a few
cons to being a neuroscientist such as having a high barrier to entry,
high competitiveness amongst peers, potentially dangerous working
environment and high dependency of grants for job security. 35
Education
Dr. Arthur Lavin felt that neuroscience arent taught enough in the
early education curriculum, commenting:
I dont see that schools are applying the best knowledge of
how minds work. Schools should be the best place for applied
neuroscience, taking the latest advances in cognitive research
and applying it to the job of educating minds.36
The undersupplied early education supplements for students
focusing in neuroscience contradict the need of a high degree in
order to obtain a job in the end. An April 2012 job search 37 turned up
several posts advertising positions available for neuroscientists.
Nearly all of the positions discovered required applicants to hold a
Ph.D., while the level of experience varied depending on the
employer. The following is a list of some actual postings found
during that job search:
35 LearningPath.org. Pros and Cons. Becoming a Neuroscientist:
Job Description & Salary Info. 2014
36 Dr. Arthur Lavin, Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at Case
Western School of Medicine. Speech.
37 LearningPath.org. Requirements. Becoming a Neuroscientist:
Job Description & Salary Info. 2014

Kristie
15

college

in

Philadelphia

advertised

for

cognitive

neuroscientist who'd be hired as an assistant professor to teach

undergraduate

psychology

and

neuroscience

courses.

The

successful applicant would hold at least a Ph.D.

Maryland

technology

company

advertised

for

neuroscientist with a Ph.D. and at least 3 years of experience in

neuroscience research to conduct research into brain body
interactions. The successful applicant would also have particular
experience in brain imaging techniques and software, technical
writing and digital signaling, among other areas.

An Iowa university advertised for a cognitive neuroscientist

who could fill a tenure-track position. The applicant needed a
Ph.D., an M.D. or both. The university sought a published
professional who had experience in clinical and experimental
neuropsychology.
According to an ASCB Newsletter in 2000 about statistics38 of the
number of bachelors degrees earned in biology 39 by men and
women, the number between the gender increased in parallel during
the first half of the 1970s, although the number of womens degrees
was less than half that of mens. Beginning in the mid-1970s, the
number of degrees earned by men declined, while the number
earned by women held steady. In the early 1990s, degrees earned
by men and women began to increase at the same rate. After the
38 Refer to Graph B.1 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
39 In this case is defined by US Department of Education as a field
that includes biochemistry, molecular biology, microbiology, and the
specialization of neurosciences.

Kristie
16
mid-1990s, the number of womens degrees rose more steeply, until
women earned more biology bachelors degrees than men.
On a doctoral degree level, the number of doctoral degrees
earned by women gradually increased over the last 30 years, and
the number of doctorates earned by men fluctuated and showed an
overall slight decline until the 1990s 40. In a different case of a
favorably gender-neutral university like the University of Alabama, it
was found that over half (53 percent) of the students majoring in
neuroscience

were

women,

and

13

of

them

were

actually

international student.41
Despite the positive trend, gender inequality is presented again in
the aspect of treatment from faculty and staff members towards
student, even though gender distinction in the family and public
realm have diminished vastly, making it still challenging for female
neuroscientists to gain higher education degree crucially needed to
secure an occupation for them later on. Interview source Professor
Sandra Hutchinson, a psychobiology graduate, acknowledges the
difficulty she encountered as a female psychobiology undergraduate
student in the 1990s.
Even if I had the benefit of being Asian, having the positive
stereotype of someone who is regarded as very studious, it was
still rather difficult to be a woman in psychobiology. I had to
constantly proof myself in comparison to other Asian male students.
40 Refer to Graph B.2 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
41 Holley, Karri. The Challenge of an Interdisciplinary Curriculum: A
Cultural Analysis of a Doctoral-Degree Program in Neuroscience.
Higher Education Vol. 58. No. 2, 2009.

Kristie
17
I think if I were Caucasian, it wouldve been much more difficult 42,
she said.
Employment
The most disconcerting drop-off of females in the academic ladder
occurred not on higher education anymore, as seen in the
employment category in the past section, rather it occurred at the
next step, application for a faculty position. Females comprised only
19 percent of the applicants for 71 different neuroscience assistant
professor

positions

at

seven

major

American

colleges

and

universities from 1995 through 2000. However, the number of

women hired for these positions was almost proportional to the
number of applicants, 18 percent overall.43
Teaching can definitely be a field where women neuroscientists
are more prominent than men neuroscientists, as they prefer
researching and pharmaceutical work more. Professor Hutchinson
added that women are more likely to teach because of the lessdemanding working hour, which the extra time can be spend with
their family and personal matters. Research doesnt stop for
anything, including your family. I felt that especially during the time
I had my first child, I worked sixteen hours per day when I was nine
months pregnant. she confessed. Overall, there are vastly more

42 Personal Interview with Sandra Hutchinson, Professor of Anatomy

and Biology, Department of Life Sciences, Santa Monica College, 20
November 2014.
43 Smith, Dean O. Gender Disparity in the Academic Pipeline:
Women in Neuroscience. Synapse Vol. 14, 2003, 332-334

Kristie
18
neurologists emphasizing on patient care than administration,
research, and teaching (in decreasing order)44.
In 2009, 57 percent of the 2.5 million female workers with a STEM
degree are comprised of physical and life sciences degrees,
compared to 31 percent of the 6.7 million male workers with a STEM
degree were graduates with physical and life sciences degrees. This
demonstrates that physical and life sciences graduates are more
likely to acquire a job than other sciences.

45

But, even though the

demand for STEM scientists is currently high, in an non-academic

placement, women are vastly underrepresented in STEM jobs and
among STEM degree holders, despite making up nearly half of the
U.S. workforce and half of the college-educated workforce. 46
In 2010, the median annual wage of medical neuroscientists
working at pharmaceutical and other medicine manufacturing
companies was around $95,000. The comparable figure for medical
neuroscientists employed by colleges and universities was about
$53,000, according to the BLS. Nonetheless, there is still a
remaining 8 percent regression-adjusted gender wage gap of
college-educated STEM workers in the field physical and life
sciences, with women receiving the lower salary between the
genders.47
44 Refer to Graph B.3 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
45 Refer to Graph B.4 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages
46 U.S. Department of Commerce. Women in STEM: A Gender Gap
to Innovation Executive Summary, 2011, 1.
47 U.S. Department of Commerce, 5.

Kristie
19

Ranks
Continuing the system of ranks from past patterns, there is only a
small portion of neuroscientists that could accomplish the highest
achievement of being a research associate. Both men and women
neuroscientists are competing to be elected as primary research
associate, having their names to appear first in the research
published. The numbers of women associate professor and professor
in the neurosciences is increasing until now, but women still show
reduced retention relative to men in the academic sector.48
With peer reviewing in mind, it was a bit more complex for women
neuroscientists to be reviewed with zero judgment attacking their
personal

condition

(for

being

woman)

rather

than

their

professional work. Professor Hutchinson had an experience where

she underwent the unfair treatment:
I did a special program where we were able to research in a
lab for 6 months. Its not that I was treated poorly but I guess
the ideas that I originally come up with in a collaborative
process, always got attributed to male lab students rather than
to myself. The male lab students never corrected that nor
change the professors opinions on that. When I talked to my
professor, I was told Oh, thats okay, whatever you say with a
slightly condescending attitude. Nevertheless, the professor
was a kind man but there is a little bit of prejudice underlying
48 Refer to Graph B.5 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages

Kristie
20
the assumption that women, especially with a youthful
appearance, cant come up with good ideas.
The derogatory behavior towards female neuroscientists results to
the fact that only one in five papers published in

Nature

Neuroscience, a bona fide scientific editorial journal, has a female

corresponding author. In addition, the composition of the journals
statistics also reflects the demographics of its own authors. Among
940 reviewers for the journal, 152 (16.2 percent) were female and
788 (83.8%) were male. This proportion of women is slightly higher
than their representation among last authors in the manuscript
sample (67 of 449, 14.9%), but lower than the proportion of female
first authors (125 of 397, 31.5 percent).
Pointing out the case of abuse of rank and power, it has also
reported by the Gender Issue in Neuroscience (GIN) members of the
Stanford University that in 2013, 228 individuals who have
committed misconduct, of which 94% involved fraud. Analysis of the
data by career stage and gender revealed that misconduct occurred
across the entire career spectrum from trainee to senior scientist
and that two-thirds of the individuals found to have committed
misconduct were male. This exceeds the overall proportion of males
among life science trainees and faculty.49

Research Regulations

49 Ferric C. Fang. Males are overrepresented among life science

researchers committing scientific misconduct mBio, 2013.

Kristie
21
Lawfully, there are no policies limiting neuroscientific researches
nowadays. Professor Hutchinson confirmed that there were no
governmental policies controlling her science service and research
work, the determining factor to when a neuroscientist can become a
neuroscience researcher is through peer reviewing and government
or faculty funding. This goes the same for both female and male
neuroscientists. In 2004-2008, the number of neuroscience articles
published has increased by 18 percent. Statistics of the rise in
related research fields are even higher: clinical neurology by 23
percent, psychiatry by 25 percent, psychology by 39 percent and
behavioral sciences by 48 percent. 50 In 2013, President Obama
announced a project called the Brain Research Through Advancing
Innovative

Neurotechnologies

(BRAIN),

which

will

potentially

allocate billions of dollars to decode the pathways of the brain, all

the way down to the neural level. This supports the premise that the
growing industry of brain research has undoubtedly create an
advantage for both female and male neuroscientists to pursue a
specialization in.
Specialized Organizations
There has been an increase of numerous organizations gathering
neuroscientists,

independently

and

government

directed.

The

progress aided both female and male neuroscientists to escape from

neurosciences umbrella term incorporation with other scientific sub
disciplines that neuroscientists had to join in the past due to there
50 Kathleen Taylor. The Brain Supremacy: Notes From the Frontiers
of Neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, 8.

Kristie
22
were no specific organization on neuroscience were available at the
time. This emancipation had been influencing a greater difference
for women neuroscientists. When women made up 21 percent of
Society for Neuroscience (SfN) membership, under the division of
SfN, Women in Neuroscience (WIN) was finally inaugurated in SfNs
1980 annual meeting. Female membership in the SfN was up to 43
percent in 2011.51
The total attendance in Neuroscience annual convention created
by the SfN has been increasing every year, from 31,975 visitors in
2011 to 32,357 in its 2012 conference. Thus overall, an opportunity
for both male and female neuroscientists becoming esteemed
members of a distinct institution of neurosciences has been
positively promoted.
Awards
Professor Sandra Hutchinson was one of the recipients for a
scholarship

award

that

allowed

her

to

pursue

career

in

psychobiology. Like Professor Hutchinson, young neuroscientists

were able to become students and receive acknowledgement for
their academic achievement and involvement within their research
or scientific service. The SfN also awards honor and support
neuroscientists at all career stages. Prizes, fellowships, and travel
awards recognize scientific achievement and discovery, outreach
efforts, contributions to the field, mentoring activities, and more.

51 Laurel L. Haak. Women In Neuroscience (WIN): The First Twenty

Years, Journal of the History of the Neuroscience Vol. 11, 2002, 71.

Kristie
23
Taken from SfNs homepage52, the SfN states their mission behind
presenting neuroscientists with multiple awards:
Each year, SfN honors some of the best research and
achievements by neuroscientists around the globe with more
than $500,000 in prizes and other compensation, such as
complimentary travel and registration for SfN's annual meeting.
These awards recognize scientists at all stages of their careers
for a variety of activities, including research that expands
knowledge of the brain and its functions, outreach programs
that educate the public about neuroscience, and mentoring
efforts that cultivate achievement for the next generation of
neuroscientists.
There is also The Peter and Patricia Gruber International Research
Award in Neuroscience established in 2005 to help support
promising young neuroscientists to pursue education and research
at a center of excellence in their field 53. Joining forces with the SfN,
an SfN committee selects two recipients, a pair of young scientists
who have demonstrated international collaboration and scientific
breakthrough, to share equally the $50,000 Gruber fellowship. The

52 Individual Prizes and Fellowships. Society for Neuroscience

Awards and Fundings, Society for Neuroscience, 2013. Web. 15
November 2014.
53 The Peter and Patricia Gruber International Research Award in
Neuroscience. The Peter and Patricia Gruber International Research
Award in Neuroscience. The Gruber Foundation, 2011. Web. 15
November 2014.

Kristie
24
award is presented at the annual meeting of the Society for
Neuroscience.
In an upper and highly prestigious echelon like the Nobel Prizes, it
is still a difficult stratum for women to cross the inequality border,
especially in the neurosciences.54 But, to a large extent, with all the
awards and prizes being given by multiple sources, it is more likely
for both male and female neurosciences to receive them earlier in a
smaller scale compared to situations in the past.

The Future
As we can see from past trends in 1960s until the present, it can
be safe to conclude that neuroscientists will keep on increasing in
number and ingenuity, both men and women. Culturally, families
and surrounding members will encourage their children to pursue
any career they want and the government will hopefully continue
their support by providing an enhancing environment for students to
accomplish their goals. There could be a decreasing or even
vanishing discrimination and inequality in neurosciences, if mentors
and staff members in higher positions treat male and female
neuroscientists without any differentiation.
Schools could also add neuroscience as a subject, side by side
with mathematics and other sciences starting from an early
education curriculum to boost the number of college students
54 Refer to Chart B.6 at the Tables, Charts, and Diagrams Pages

Kristie
25
majoring

neuroscience

in

time

ahead.

Lowering

tuition

in

specialization higher degree institutes or granting more scholarships

would increase number of undergraduate neuroscience students
continuing as graduate students.
Following up with President Obamas BRAIN project initiative and
launch,

will

unthinkable

undeniably
and

would

broaden

unlock

policies

or

new

research

barriers

areas

hindering

neuroscientific researchers. As a strong growth field, neuroscience

will be projecting employment growth of 36 percent between 2010
and 2020

55

The high and solid circulation of interest and investment

in neuroscience would eventually to more specialized organizations

and awards granted for neuroscientists, both male and female.
Eventually, with more awards, acceptance, networking, and financial
aid, a neuroscientist could reach his or her potential. Thus, the evergrowing circle of neuroscientists and all of their innovations could be
sustained.
Conclusion
There is no shortage of proposals for this exploding field. Only
time will tell which ones are mere pipe dreams created by
overheated imagination of science-fiction writers and which ones
represent solid avenues for future scientific research. Progress in
neuroscience has been phenomenal and in many ways modern
engineering in biology and psychology has been the key.

55 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Kristie
26
Neuroscience paved way for both men and women scientists
explore the wonders of the mind and behavior. Looking at the rise in
the trend of neuroscience in both mainstream media and scientific
publications, it is highly undoubted that more research, publication
and occupation opportunities will be opened for both men and
women neuroscientists in the near future.
The inception of societal acceptance, educational opportunities,
strong-hearted

workers,

loosely-tied

political

agenda,

encouragement from prestigious ranking system, a responsible

specialized organization and prized possession in 1960s created a
novel route for emerging neuroscience scientists and scholars, both
men and women. Moreover, this movement affects greatly on the
face of women in science. In the end of the day, neurosciences and
any other sciences should encourage diversity, discipline, and pure
ingenuity. Just like exactly what Professor Hutchinson said as she
ended her interview:
Really, natural or biological intelligence doesnt matter, it is all
the time and effort you are willing to spend in to accomplishing
that goal.

Kristie
27

Tables, Charts and Diagrams

Table A. 1.

Table A. 2.

Kristie
28

Table A.3.

Kristie
29

Kristie
30

Table A. 4.

Table A. 5.

Kristie
31

Graph B. 1.

Kristie
32
Bachelors Degrees Earned in Biology by Gender and Year, 19701998

Graph B. 2.
Doctorates Earned in Biology by Gender and Year, 1970-1998

Kristie
33
Graph B. 3.
Physiological Occupations by Specialty, 2010

Source: AMA Physician Masterfile (December 2010)

Kristie
34

Graph B. 4.
College-educated Workers with a STEM Degree by Gender and STEM
Degree Field, 2009

Graph B. 5.
Women Neuroscientists by Work Field and Year, 1988-1998

Source: Huffman et al., 200

Kristie
35
Graph B. 6.

Nobel Prize Winners Since 1901 to 2014 by Category and Gender

Male Recipient(s)
Female Recipient(s)

197

196
165

11

1.8

Source: Reprinted from ASCB Newsletter (2000, vol. 23, pp. 1821), with permission from the
American Society for Cell Biology.

Kristie
36
Interview Information
Source
Sandra Hutchinson, Professor of Anatomy and Biology, Department
of Life Sciences, at Santa Monica College. A Graduate of
Pennsylvania State Dept. of Psychobiology and conference member
of Society for Neuroscience since the 1990s.
Questions
1. How do you first develop interest in Psychobiology?
2. Where did you graduate from and what was your research for
your graduate program?
3. How was the view towards women in psychobiology at your
time?
4. Have you encountered any difficulty as a woman in
psychobiology? How did you finally overcome these obstacles
in the end?
5. What made you decide to teach life sciences in Santa Monica
College?
6. Is balancing family and work tough for you as a
psychobiologist?
7. Throughout your education and career, how important was
female role models and mentors in guiding you?
8. Do you think the number of women scientists in psychobiology
increased or decreased by now? What do you think are the
factors contributing to the change?
9. If there were any difficulties that a neuroscientist today can
face, what would be the difficulties?
10.
Are there any law regulating researches and
publications in psychobiology?
11.
Do you have any advice to women pursuing
pscyhobiology?

Kristie
37
Works Consulted
Barinaga, M.Profile of a field: Neuroscience - The Pipeline is
Leaking. Science Vol 255 (1992): 1366. JSTOR. Web. 31 Oct
2014.
Bigart, Homer. Nixon Scores Cuts in Science Funds. New York
Times. 6 October 1968, 74, Microfilm.
Bird, Karen S. Do women publish fewer journal articles than men?
Sex differences in publication productivity in the social
sciences. British Journal of Sociology of Education Vol. 32. No.
6 (2011). JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
Brain Study Planned, Trustees at U. of Rochester Back Research
Center. New York Times. 9 December 1969, 24, Microfilm.
Buchmann et al. Gender Inequalities in Education. Annual Review
of Sociology Vol. 34. (2008). JSTOR. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
Dash, Joan. The Triumph of Discovery. New Jersey: Julian Messner,
1991. Print.
Dryburgh,

Heather.

Work

Hard,

Play

Hard:

Women

and

Professionalization in Engineering Adapting to the Culture.

Gender and Society Vol. 13. No. 5 (1999). JSTOR. Web. 27 Oct.
2014.
Fang FC, Bennett JW, Casadevall A. Males are overrepresented
among

life

science

misconduct mBio, 2013.

researchers

committing

scientific

Kristie
38
Finger, Stanley, Origins of Neuroscience. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1994. Print.
Women And The History of The Neurosciences. Journal of the
History of Neurosciences Vol. 11. (2002): 80-86. MEDLINE.
Web. 31 Oct. 2014.
Fort, Deborah. A Hand Up: Women Mentoring Women in Science.
Washington D.C.: Association for Women in Science, 2005.
Print.
French, J. D.,D. B. Lindsley, and H. W. Magoun. An American
Contribution to Neuroscience: The Brain Research Institute.
Los Angeles: UCLA Publ. Serv., 1984. Print.
Friedman, Sharon M. Research Report: Women in Engineering:
Influential Factor for Career Choice. Newsletter on Science,
Technology and Human Values. No. 20 (1977). JSTOR. Web. 27
Oct. 2014.
Goertzel, Mildred George, Victor Goertzel, and Ted George Goertzel.
Cradles of Eminence. Boston: Little, Brown and Company,
1962. Print.
Gross, Charles G. Brain, Vision, Memory: Tales in the History of
Neuroscience. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1998. Print.
Haak, Laurel L. Women In Neuroscience (WIN): The First Twenty
Years, Journal of the History of the Neuroscience Vol. 11 Page
70-79 (2002). JSTOR. Web 31 Oct. 2014.

Kristie
39
Harmon, Lindsey R. A Century of Doctorates: Data Analyses of
Growth and Change. Washington DC: NAS, 1978. Print.
Career Achievements of the National Defense Education Act
(title IV) Fellows of 1959-1973. A Report to the U.S. Office
of Education. 1977, 7+10.
Holley, Karri. The Challenge of an Interdisciplinary Curriculum: A
Cultural

Analysis

of

Doctoral-Degree

Program

in

Neuroscience. Higher Education Vol. 58. No. 2 (2009). JSTOR.

Web. 20 Oct. 2014.

Hruby et al. Neuroscience and Reading: A Review for Reading

Education Researchers. Reading Research Quarterly Vol. 46,
No. 2 (2011). JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
Hutchinson, Sandra. Personal interview. 20 November 2014.
Individual Prizes and Fellowships. Society for Neuroscience Awards
and Fundings. Society for Neuroscience, 2013. Web. 15
November

2014.

<http://www.sfn.org/awards-and-

funding/individual-prizes-and-fellowships>.
John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, Reports of the President and
Treasurer. New York: John Simon Guggenheim Foundation,
1970. Print.
Kaku, Michio. The Future of The Mind. London: Penguin Group, 2014.
Print.
Levi-Montalicini, Rita. In Praise of Imperfection. New York: Basic
Books Inc., 1988. Print.

Kristie
40
Luckenbill-edds, Louise. The Educational Pipeline for Women in
Biology: No Longer Leaking?. BioScience Vol. 52 No. 6 (2002).
JSTOR. Web. 1 Nov. 2014.
McGrayne, Sharon B. Nobel Prize Women in Science: Their Lives,
Struggles and Momentous Discoveries. New York: Carol
Publishing Group, 1993. Print.
Milestones in Neuroscience Research University of Washington.
University of Washington, 2013. Web. 30 October 2014.
The Peter and Patricia Gruber International Research Award in
Neuroscience. The Peter and Patricia Gruber International
Research Award in Neuroscience. The Gruber Foundation,
2011. Web. 15 November 2014.<http://gruber.yale.edu/peterand-patricia-gruber-international-research-awardneuroscience>
Radical Sciences Brought to Control. New York Times. 10 May
1969, 14, Microfilm.
Reinhold, Robert. Scientists Tackle Mystery of Brain. New York
Times. 30 December 1968, 20, Microfilm.
Report of the Subcommitee on the Status of Academic Women on
the Berkeley Campus Berkeley: JLP. May 1970, app. 15, 7778.
Rose, F.C. and Bynum, W.F., Historical Aspects of the Neurosciences.
New York: Raven Press, 1982. Print.

Kristie
41
Rossiter,

Margaret

W.

Women

Scientists

in

America:

Before

Affirmative Action (1940-1972). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1982. Print.
Selye, Hans. From Dream to Discovery: On Being a Scientist. New
York: Arno, 1975. Print.
Smith, Dean O. Gender Disparity in the Academic Pipeline: Women
in Neuroscience. Synapse Vol. 14 (2003): 332-334. JSTOR.
Web. 1 Nov. 2014.
Street, Warren R. A Chronology of Events in American Psychology.
Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1994.
Print.
Tang, Joyce. Scientific Pioneers: Women Succeeding in Science.
Lanham: University Press of America, 2006. Print.
Taylor, Kathleen. The Brain Supremacy: Notes From the Frontiers of
Neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print.

Theodore Caplow. The Academic Marketplace. New York: Arno, 1958,

pg 111
Tokuhama-Espinosa, Tracey. A Brief History in the Science of
Learning. John Hopkins University. John Hopkins University,
December 2011. Web. 30 October 2014.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to
Innovation Executive Summary, 2011.

Kristie
42
USOE. Earned Degrees Conferred by Higher Educational Institutions.
National Center for Educational Stastics, 1963.
V.A. Urged to Widen Brain Surgery Rules. New York Times. 5 April
1970, 55, Microfilm.
Women In Neuroscience: A Numbers Game. Nature Neuroscience
Vol. 9 No. 7 (2006): 835. MEDLINE. Web. 31 Oct 2014.
Zuckerman, Harriet, Jonathan R. Cole, and John T. Bruer. The Outer
Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. New York: W. W.
Norton & Company, 1991. Print.