Biology subjects

Konopasky, A.

Publications and source records attributed to Konopasky, A..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2023

Epistemic oppression of Black women in medical education publishing: A bibliometric study using intersectionality methodology

BackgroundBlack women in academic medicine experience racial and gender discrimination, all while being tasked with improving a flawed system. Representation of Black women in medicine remains low, yet they bear the burden of fostering diversity and mentoring trainees, exacerbating their minority tax and emotional labor, and negatively impacting career progression. ObjectiveTo complement qualitative accounts of Black women authors in the medical education literature with a quantitative account of their representation. DesignAn intersectional methodology employing bibliometric analysis and testimonio reflection. SubjectsUS-based authors of journal articles published in medical education journals between 2000 and 2020. Main measuresAuthor race was determined using a probability-based algorithm incorporating US Census data, and author gender was ascribed using Social Security Administration records. We conducted two negative binomial generalized linear models by first and last author publications. Metadata for each article was retrieved from Web of Science and PubMed to include author names, country of institutional affiliation, and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Results were contextualized via the "testimonio" account of a Black woman author. Key ResultsOf 21,945 unique authors, Black women (and other racially minoritized groups) published far fewer first and last authors papers than white women and men. In addition, major MeSH terms used by Black women authors reveal little overlap of highly ranked medical education topics. The testimonio further narrated struggles with belonging and racial identity. ConclusionBlack women are underrepresented in medical education publishing and feel a lack of belonging. We believe that dismantling oppressive structures in the publishing ecosystem and the field is imperative for achieving equity. Additionally, further experiential accounts are needed to contextualize this quantitative account and understand oppression in medical education publishing.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2022

Putting on academic armor: How Black physicians and trainees take stances to make racism visible amidst publishing constraints

IntroductionWhile there are a growing number of empirical studies of Black physicians and trainees experiences of racism, there are still few accounts from a first-person perspective. These personal commentaries or editorials require taking a delicate stance, balancing the professional, social, and individual. Black authors in the medical publishing space, who already experience microaggressions and racial trauma in their work spaces, must put on their academic armor to further experience them in publishing spaces. Medicine and medical education interpellate each of us, including the authors and readers of this piece, as a particular kind of subject. Beginning with a narrative grounding in the authors personal stances, this study seeks to understand the stances Black physicians and trainees take as they share their personal experiences of racism while protecting the institution of medicine from racisms irreparable harms. MethodsThe authors searched four databases identifying 29 articles authored by Black physicians and trainees describing their experiences. During initial analysis, the authors identified three sets of discursive strategies: identification (introducing and tracking themselves throughout the article); intertextuality (dialoguing and drawing on other "texts" beyond the focus of the articles); and space-time (social constructions of space and time linked to a network of social practices). The authors used a Google form to capture these strategies and direct quotes from the articles. Throughout the study, the authors reflected on their own stances in relation to the experience of conducting the study and its findings. ResultsAuthors engaged in stance taking, which aligned with the concept of donning academic armor, by evaluating and positioning themselves with respect to racism and the norms of academic discourse in response to ongoing conversations both within medicine and in the broader US culture. They did this by (a) positioning themselves as being Black and, therefore, qualified to notice and name personal racist experiences while also aligning themselves with the reader through shared professional experiences and goals, (b) intertextual connections to other related events, people, and institutions that they-and their readers-value and (c) aligning themselves with a hoped-for future rather than a racist present. DiscussionBecause the discourses of medicine and medical publishing interpellate Black authors as Others they must carefully consider the stances they take, particularly when naming racism. The academic armor they put on must not only be able to defend them from attack, but help them slip unseen through institutional bodies replete with mechanisms to eject them. In addition to analyzing their own personal stance, authors leave readers with thought provoking questions regarding this armor as they return to narrative grounding.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2021

I, We, and They: A Linguistic and Narrative Exploration of the Authorship Process

IntroductionWhile authorship plays a powerful role in the academy, research indicates many authors engage in questionable practices like honorary authorship. This suggests that authorship may be a contested space where individuals must exercise agency--a dynamic and emergent process, embedded in context--to negotiate potentially conflicting norms among published criteria, disciplines, and informal practices. This study explores how authors narrate their own and others agency in making authorship decisions. MethodWe conducted a mixed-methods analysis of 24 first authors accounts of authorship decisions on a recent multi-author paper. Authors included 14 females and 10 males in health professions education (HPE) from U.S. and Canadian institutions (10 assistant, 6 associate, and 8 full professors). Analysis took place in three phases: (1) linguistic analysis of grammatical structures shown to be associated with agency (coding for main clause subjects and verb types); (2) narrative analysis to create a "moral" and "title" for each account; and (3) integration of (1) and (2). ResultsParticipants narrated other authors most frequently as main clause subjects (n = 191), then themselves (I; n = 151), inanimate nouns (it, the paper; n = 146), and author team (we; n = 105). Three broad types of agency were narrated: distributed (n = 15 participants), focusing on how resources and work were spread across team members; individual (n = 6), focusing on the first authors action; and collaborative (n = 3), focusing on group actions. These three types of agency contained four sub-types, e.g., supported, contested, task-based, negotiated. DiscussionThis study highlights the complex and emergent nature of agency narrated by authors when making authorship decisions. Published criteria offer us starting point--the stated rules of the authorship game; this paper offers us a next step--the enacted and narrated approach to the game.

scientific communication and education↗