December 11, 2024
5 minimum read
Silent prejudice prevents black scientists from winning Nobel Prizes
The way scientists acknowledge each other’s work overlooks the original contributions of Black scientists. The Nobel Committee needs to recognize how this excludes Black scientists from awards.

The 2024 Nobel Prize Ceremony will be held on December 10, 2024 at the Stockholm Concert Hall in Stockholm, Sweden.
Pascal Le Segretin/Getty Images
Marie Maynard Daly should have won the Nobel Prize. She was the first black woman to earn a Ph.D. in this country. She earned her PhD in chemistry and, in the 1950s and 1960s, discovered the important connection between high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and clogged arteries, which can lead to heart attacks, strokes, and other medical problems. I discovered. This was a major discovery in medicine, paving the way for the development of statins, which are still prescribed to millions of Americans each year to reduce their risk of heart attack.
Such a discovery easily embodies Alfred Nobel’s philosophy of awarding the Nobel Prize to those who have “produced the greatest benefit to humanity.” And since then, several other scientists have won Nobel Prizes for their research on cholesterol metabolism and regulation. So why wasn’t Daley, who made the first connections, receiving this prestigious award during his lifetime?
I think that’s because the Nobel committee, whose selection process is notoriously secretive, emphasizes how scientists refer to each other’s work as a basis for how important their work is. are thinking. Typically, research that wins a Nobel Prize is referenced more than 1,000 times before the scientist who conducted the research receives the award. These references, known as citations, are a proxy for scientific importance but leave room for bias.
About supporting science journalism
If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting our award-winning journalism. Currently subscribing. By subscribing, you help ensure future generations of influential stories about the discoveries and ideas that shape the world today.
Konrad Block and Fyodor Leinen, who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1964, also won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1985, even though their own discoveries depended heavily on Daly’s earlier discoveries. Michael Brown and Joseph Goldstein, who did the same, did not mention her in their acceptance speeches.. When those researchers and others made discoveries and published their results, they rarely mentioned her work. Lacking such references and accolades, Daley and other black scientists are denied the Nobel Prizes they rightfully deserve, and are instead suppressed from the historical record of science, and even It has been erased.
We believe that the Nobel Committee can and does demonstrate gender and racial bias, both overt and unconscious, in the way scientists recognize people as leaders in their fields. I believe we need to recognize this. There have been 17 black Nobel laureates in the fields of peace, literature, and economics, but no black scientist has ever won a Nobel Prize in physiology/medicine, physics, or chemistry. Asking the question, “Why don’t black scientists win awards?” This is the first step toward recognizing the contributions that Black scientists have made throughout history.
As current and future Black physicians and scientists, we are dismayed by reports that the published work of Black scientists is referenced far less than the work of white scientists. In the hierarchy of publications, the first author of a paper is usually the scientist who performed much of the experimental work described in the paper, and the last author is usually the scientist who oversaw the research program or individual project. A very senior scientist. scientist. Neuroscientist Maxwell A. Bertolero and colleagues studied who cites whom in neuroscience research papers and found that papers with white first and last authors received 5.4 percent more citations than expected, whereas They found that papers with first and last authors of color were 9.3 percent less cited than expected. . Inspired by this study, Fengyuan Liu, Talal Rahwan, and Bedoor Alshebri at New York University Abu Dhabi asked similar questions, but looked more closely at four racial categories and several scientific fields. . They found that the work of Black scientists was significantly underrepresented compared to similar work published by scientists of other races.
As studies like this reveal that the work of Black scientists often goes unrecognized, we explore how this disparity in citations can lead to paradigm-changing discoveries by Black scientists. We have been diligently investigating whether it is reducing the It is clear that the number of times a scientist’s work is referenced is important to the Nobel committee that selects each award. The more citations you receive, the greater the impact your research has on your field. But if citations are subject to such potential biases, how can this be an objective measure of the importance of a scientific discovery? It is also clear that using citations as a proxy unintentionally ignores the contributions of Black scientists. Black scientists are already less likely to be cited, regardless of the true impact of their work. the study. And this emphasis on quotes over real impact explains scenarios like Marie Maynard Daly’s. Her research was the basis for research that won two Nobel Prizes, but her name was not deemed worthy of such recognition. And why major scientific discoveries made by other Black scientists, such as Percy Lavon Julian, Katherine Johnson, and Charles Drew, to name a few, have been ignored by awarding bodies and the field at large. is also explained. This further reflects systemic inequalities in education, instruction, funding, and assessment, all of which have been described and investigated in the United States and around the world.
Recognizing the bias in the criteria used by the Nobel Committee, and the broader bias woven into the academic field when it comes to evaluating Black scientists, is the first step toward creating a more equal measure of scientific impact . Further addressing this fundamental bias in the Nobel committee selection process and beyond will not only help the work of Black scientists receive the recognition it deserves; It will also enrich science and society as a whole. This isn’t about representation. It’s about innovation and progress in science, and research shows that scientists, especially from minority backgrounds, are highly innovative.
Other prestigious award committees, such as the MacArthur Foundation, have shown that it is possible to target such bias and underrepresentation. Award-giving organizations have made a clear commitment to recognizing the significant contributions of scholars of color, with foundations awarding MacArthur Genius Grants to even fewer Black scientists. But scientists themselves must also play a role in correcting the historical record by ensuring that Black scientists are properly cited and given the recognition they deserve.
When the important contributions of Black scientists are excluded, we all lose. Without the seminal work of Daly, Julian, Johnson, and Drew, the world would be a very different place. That’s why it’s time for award committees and other institutions to finally recognize the important discoveries made by Black scientists that benefit all humanity and give them the recognition they deserve.
This is an opinion and analysis article and the views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of the author. scientific american.