Andrew W. Lo appointed to Annual Reviews Board of Directors

I am pleased to announce that Andrew W. Lo has joined the Board of Directors at Annual Reviews, effective January 1, 2019. Andrew is the Charles E. and Susan T. Harris Professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, director of the MIT Laboratory for Financial Engineering, a principal investigator at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, and an affiliated faculty member of the MIT Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. He is also an external faculty member of the Santa Fe Institute and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Andrew is the founding and current Co-Editor with Robert C. Merton of the Annual Review of Financial Economics. His current research spans evolutionary models of investor behavior and adaptive markets, systemic risk and financial regulation, quantitative models of financial markets, financial applications of machine-learning techniques and secure multi-party computation, and healthcare finance. His most recent book, Adaptive Markets: Financial Evolution at the Speed of Thought, won multiple awards.

Annual Reviews will benefit enormously from Andrew’s expertise in research, economics, and publishing over the coming years. He described his enthusiasm and support for the mission of Annual Reviews during his presentation at the 2008 Financial Crisis: A Ten-Year Review conference in November 2018, which you can watch in the following video.

Board Member, Sharon R. Long wins the Selman A. Waksman Award in Microbiology

The winner of the 2019 Selman A. Waksman Award, presented to recognize a major advance in the field of microbiology, is Annual Reviews Board MemberSharon R. Long, Stanford University.

Long is a pioneering molecular biologist whose research on the symbiosis between plants and nitrogen-fixing bacteria explains how some plants thrive without nitrogen fertilizer, making agriculture and natural environments more sustainable. 

In recognition of the award, we’ve made the PDF of Long’s 1989 Annual Reviews article, entitled Rhizobium Geneticsfreely available to download. Thank you, Sharon, for your ground-breaking research and for your many contributions to Annual Reviews.

Congratulations to Robert C. Kennicutt, Jr., winner of the 2019 NAS Award for Scientific Reviewing.

Congratulations Robert C. Kennicutt, Jr., Professor of Astronomy, University of Arizona; Executive Director of the Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy, Texas A&M, for winning the 2019 National Academy of Sciences Award for Scientific Reviewing, sponsored by us!

Kennicutt’s influential 1998 review paper, “Star Formation in Galaxies Along the Hubble Sequence,” has become one of the most-cited papers in astrophysics. The paper (PDF freely available to download here) synthesized a broad review of stellar formation, proving a critical intellectual foundation for the field, and also gave birth to two new fields of investigation: the characterization of tracers of star formation rates and the study of the connection between gas and star formation in galaxies.

Kennicutt is also known for the Kennicutt–Schmidt law, which defines a relation between the gas density and star formation rate in a given region, and for his role in constraining the value of the Hubble constant, the unit of measurement that astronomers and astrophysicists use to describe the expansion of the universe. He served as co-leader of the scientific team that definitively measured the expansion of the universe, and continues to research new methods to characterize the evolution of nearby and distant galaxies.   

The award will be presented on Sunday, April 28 at 2:00pm in Washington, D.C., at the NAS Annual Meeting. More information on all the NAS 2019 Award recipients can be found here.

A docent tour of Annual Reviews

Welcome Richard Gallagher, President and Editor-In-Chief of nonprofit publisher Annual Reviews, to our news blog. In the coming months Richard, an immunologist, science editor, and publisher, will contribute occasional posts from a personal and professional perspective here and in Annual Reviews’ Twitter stream (tweets signed RG).

On a recent visit to Contemporary Jewish Museum in San Francisco, I spent a fascinating hour being guided around a collection of nineteenth- and twentieth-century garments from diverse Jewish communities by a docent (volunteer guide). She brought to life an exhibit that I would otherwise, in my ignorance, have breezed through in minutes.

It got me thinking that a docent tour of some personal favorites of Annual Reviews articles published in 2018 might be of interest. All articles described are freely available to read through the end of February, 2019. I’d be delighted to have suggestions for articles to include in future guides (simply leave a comment on this post or tweet us @AnnualReviews).

Let’s start with a brief article on “Science as a Culinary Art” from the Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science. It presents a vision for transforming medicine based on sharing the responsibility for collecting data and testing ideas among, essentially, everyone. Author Nicholas Tatonetti of Columbia University, New York, likens the process to cooking. “Today alone,” he writes, “billions will form hypotheses about the right combination of spices, temperatures, and wine pairings. Each of these hypotheses will be tested, evaluated for their success, and accepted or rejected, ultimately contributing to the body of human culinary knowledge.” Why can’t the same be done for biomedical research, he asks, with Big Data as the ingredients? It’s a clear and optimistic idea.  

One group that is already contributing a lot of data to the pursuit of health and well-being is people age 100 years and over, the centenarians. A century ago, life expectancy was 50-55 years. Today, in developed countries, it’s up to 87 years for women and 84 for men, and there are some 434,000 100-year-olds alive right now. I suspect that most of us would sign up for a substantial life extension if we knew we’d be healthy enough to enjoy it, so the factors that impact longevity, covered in this Annual Review of Nutrition article on Nutrition and Inflammation by three researchers from Bologna, Italy, are of more than passing interest. I was surprised (read dismayed) to find that regular timing of meals is critical, in part due to effects on the gut microbiome and on sleeping patterns.

Annual Review of Cancer Biology, Circadian Clock’s Cancer Connections.

The importance of maintaining circadian rhythms isn’t just a key characteristic of healthy aging and longevity; another great review in the Annual Review of Cancer Biology, Circadian Clock’s Cancer Connections, traces the link between circadian dysfunction and cancer risk. If your lifestyle is anything like mine, that is, unregulated eating and sleeping patterns and a lot of travel across time zones, a rethink may be required! I wonder when circadian rhythm gurus will start to appear on YouTube – if they haven’t already.

Annual Review of Anthropology, Industrial Meat Production.

Substantially reducing meat consumption was a personal change I made in 2018 that may provide some positive health impact. My decision was made primarily on environmental grounds, but reading an anthropologist’s take on corporate animal agribusiness (Industrial Meat Production in the Annual Review of Anthropology), offers additional reasons. Some of the statistics quoted by Alex Blanchette (Tufts University, Massachusetts) are grimly impressive, including the fact that “[b]etween 1935 and 1995, the time it took to raise a mature chicken decreased by some 60%, and yet the average size of each grown bird swelled by a stunning 65%.” Other facts, such as the existence of packinghouses where 20,000 pigs are killed every day, are simply grim. I challenge you not to find the “deanimalization” of meat to be grotesque. 

Annual Review of Criminology, Gun Markets.

This article on Gun Markets from the Annual Review of Criminology addresses an even greater social ill, gun violence. While the article is focused on the transactions that arm criminals and the sources of their weapons, it also provides an overview of guns in the United States. “Increasingly, people buy guns not to shoot animals or targets but rather to prepare for a time when they might need to shoot or at least threaten another person,” Philip Cook (Duke University, North Carolina) writes. “Half of gun owners say that self-protection is the reason or primary reason they own a gun.” That’s before he turns his attention to criminal use! Cook describes the underground gun market as “thin and balkanized,” depending on personal connections. Depressingly, after assessing regulation changes to impact this market, the best that he can say is that “[t]here is enough evidence of regulatory effectiveness to rule out the extreme version of the futility argument.” Hmm. Meanwhile, in 2018 there were 35 murders within 5 miles of my house, of which 30 were shootings. As an immigrant here in the United States, I find it unfathomable that we are prepared to live (and die) with the current legal, and consequent illegal, gun cultures.

Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, Mycofluidics.

And now for something completely different: mycofluidics, which (of course!) is microfluidics in fungi. Cells are the building block of all forms of life. You can think of them as enormously complex over-stuffed bags of chemistry and biochemistry. There must be rules that bring order, direction, and intent to the chaos, and this enthralling article from the Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics (Mycofluidics) describes one such set of rules: the fluid mechanics and engineering that underlie the growth and dispersal of fungi. For example, Marcus Roper (UCLA, California) and Agnese Seminara (Institut de Physique de Nice, France) describe four different approaches by which fungi can relocate by using explosive movement – remember, fungi lack limbs, fins, or wings – that are quite extraordinary. The illustrations are excellent and their writing is wonderfully descriptive; for example, “The unfurling of a mushroom is a feat of reverse origami.”

Another mind-expanding article covers our new-found ability to explore evolution through the analysis of ancient biomolecules. In Ancient Biomolecules and Evolutionary Inference from the Annual Review of Biochemistry, a distinguished group of European experts describe the preservation of ancient DNA, proteins, and lipids; how they are extracted and analyzed; and the unique processes developed for their sequencing and analysis. The second half of the article sheds new light on everything from the origins of early life forms to the domestication of plants and animals. Analyzing ancient biomolecules “profoundly deepened our understanding of the origin of early life forms, adaptation and extinction processes, and past migrations and admixtures that gave rise to present-day biological diversity, including in our own species,” the authors say. And this is just the beginning; their extensive “Future Directions” section points to even more profound insights to come.

As a keen-but-crummy chess player, I took some pleasure in reading that championship chess, attained by only the most gifted minds, is actually easier than moving the pieces. Dubious? In Toward Robotic Manipulation from the Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, Matthew Mason (Carnegie Mellon University, Pennsylvania) explains that while there are world-champion-level chess computers, they “still need human beings to do the actual moving of the chess pieces.” Manipulation of objects (control of the environment through selective contact) is a routine but extraordinary talent that animals in general, and especially humans, excel at, but that presents an array of challenges to robots. Mason contrasts animals’ manipulative breadth, robustness, and adaptability on the one hand, with specialization and performance advantages on the other gripper. He describes how machine learning will improve robotic manipulation, but it will be a while before a robot team competes in baseball’s World Series. 

Science is a pursuit of excellence that has parallels in art, athletics, cooking, and even comedy. But, while we have ready access to the deepest thoughts and the daily doings of rock stars, football players, chefs, and funnymen, similar treatment of researchers is rare; unfortunately so, because it could help reduce the gap between science and mainstream culture. Many of the Annual Reviews journals do include autobiographical profiles, which present scientists as, well, real people. A case in point is Fred Ausubel’s Tracing My Roots: How I Became a Plant Biologist from the Annual Review of Genetics. Ausubel’s early earnestness, influenced by C.S. Lewis and Zhou Enlai; curiosity; collegiality; and, ultimately, flexibility on what he wanted to study shine through in this description of evolving research on plant-microbe interactions over a 20-year period between the mid-1960s and mid-1980s.

I hope you’ll dip in to some of these articles. None of them are a quick, relaxing read, but they’ll leave you with the natural high that a little insight provides and a positive feeling about humankind’s abilities to explore our external and internal worlds.

Annual Reviews is a nonprofit publisher dedicated to synthesizing and integrating knowledge for the progress of science and the benefit of society.

Mass Incarceration’s Collateral Damage

Homelessness, unemployment, higher debt rates, poor health for both the formerly incarcerated and their families, disengagement from community life and isolation… There is plenty of evidence that jail time causes social damage in the United States, which accentuates inequalities because it affects poor people of color disproportionately. The US has the highest imprisonment rate of the developed world and a complex criminal justice system, yet data on the mechanisms by which mass incarceration generates harm on this scale are surprisingly hard to come by.

In their article “Collateral Consequences of Punishment: A Critical Review and Path Forward,” in the first volume of the Annual Review of Criminology, David S. Kirk, of the University of Oxford, and Sara Wakefield, of Rutgers University, argue that imprisonment rates and confinement conditions vary significantly across states. “These differences are not well understood or systematically documented but likely influence the scope, magnitude, and character of collateral consequences,” they write.

The federal system, for example, houses only 13 percent of all prisoners, half of whom are sentenced on drug-related charges. “Crimmigration”, the portmanteau for immigration and criminal law, is also on the rise in the federal system, although this hike “reflects an increasing punitiveness toward immigrants rather than a growth in the crime rate among immigrants.” In contrast, the jail system houses the higher number of prisoners, and the state system has 53% of its inmates locked in for violent crimes. Given the differences between the two systems on post-incarceration consequences, the authors believe contrasting the data could lead to a better grasp on the stakes of imprisonment: “Unfortunately, comparisons across different types of confinement are nearly impossible to accomplish with available data.”

Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 12.19.03
Kirk & Wakefield, 2018. Annual Review of Criminology.

“Crimmigration” policies have become stricter under the Trump administration, as the threshold for deportation has dropped considerably, and any alleged criminal offender is set for deportation upon arrest, regardless of conviction. Detained migrant children are also an urgent topic of research, as the number of unaccompanied children apprehended by US Border Patrol has been growing steadily. Evidence shows their detainment has similar characteristics to typical imprisonment, and they endure the same suspected cases of verbal, physical, sexual abuse and human rights violations. There are no systematic investigations of the consequences of these conditions on detained children and their families, one of the reasons the authors recommend that immigration be made a more central focus of the collateral consequence research agenda.

The authors argue the consequences of the crime, such as imprisonment, should be studied separately from consequences of the punishment itself, like difficulties finding employment. They also think the impact of specific types of prison and the conditions of confinement need to be examined. They advocate for the creation of more robust databases compiling all the information on the inmates, during and after their time in jail.

They recommend looking to Europe, specifically Nordic countries, for a model of continuing information collection that tracks inmates and their families. These nations use a national registration system that allows for cross-referencing data on an individual’s crime and punishment with, e.g., their education and family status.

Read more in the first volume of the Annual Review of Criminology.

Professor Karen S. Cook elected as new Chair of the Annual Reviews Board of Directors

Karen S. Cook, the Ray Lyman Wilbur Professor of Sociology; Director of the Institute for Research in the Social Sciences; Vice-Provost for Faculty Development and Diversity at Stanford University; and Class V Secretary, National Academy of Sciences, has been unanimously elected to the role of Chair of the Board at Annual Reviews, effective June 1, 2018.

Dr. Cook has served as Co-Editor of the Annual Review of Sociology since 1998, and as Vice-Chair of the Annual Reviews Board of Directors since 2010, a position also held by Dr. Sandra M. Faber, Professor and Astronomer, University of California, Santa Cruz. Dr. Cook conducts research on social interaction, social networks, social exchange, and trust. She has authored and co-authored numerous reviews and papers, as well as edited a number of books in the Russell Sage Foundation Trust Series.

She succeeds Professor Richard N. Zare, the Marguerite Blake Wilbur Professor in Natural Science, Department of Chemistry, Stanford University, who has led the Board for 23 years, from 1995 to 2018. Professor Zare also served as the Co-Editor of the Annual Review of Analytical Chemistry from 2006 to 2010. He has co-authored numerous reviews, including two autobiographies. Professor Zare is renowned for his research in the area of laser chemistry, which has led to numerous awards and honors.

During his tenure, in partnership with Dr. Samuel Gubins, President and Editor-in-Chief Emeritus of Annual Reviews (1995 to 2015), Professor Zare expanded Annual Reviews to many fields while maintaining the highest standards. Annual Reviews continues to be a unique and impactful publisher as a result of his guidance and leadership.

Dr. Richard Gallagher, President and Editor-in-Chief of Annual Reviews, said,

“Passing the baton from Dick to Karen offers a seamless progression of leadership for our Board. Dick’s long-lasting passion for and contributions to our mission—to synthesize scientific knowledge so that investigators can plan new and impactful research directions—will continue through a new lecture series named in his honor and his ongoing participation in the Board. The role of Board Chair is now in another pair of excellent hands. On behalf of the Board, Editorial Committees, and staff of Annual Reviews, I congratulate Karen and look forward to continuing our working relationship for many years to come.” 

Annual Reviews is a nonprofit publisher dedicated to synthesizing and integrating knowledge to stimulate the progress of science and benefit society. For more than 85 years, Annual Reviews has offered expert review journals which today span 50 titles across the biomedical, life, physical, and social sciences.  Annual Reviews launched Knowable Magazine in 2017, an open access digital magazine to explore the real-world significance of this highly cited scholarship and make it accessible to broad audiences.

 

 

Annual Reviews publishes first multidisciplinary autonomous systems review journal

The Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, led by Editor Naomi Ehrich Leonard, highlights theoretical and applied research in control and robotics that drives and enriches the engineering of autonomous systems.

Annual Reviews, a nonprofit publisher of scholarly review journals for more than 85 years, announces the publication of the first volume of the Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, its 49th review journal. The new journal is the first of its kind to cover both the broad fields of control and robotics and their fundamental roles in the increasingly important area of autonomous systems.

Topics in the first volume cover control and its connections to game theory, distributed optimization, Kalman filtering, geometric mechanics, privacy, data-driven strategies, and deep learning, together with robotics and its connections to manipulation, materials, mechanisms, planning, decision-making, and synthesis. Applications include artificial touch, soft micro and bio-inspired robotics, minimally invasive medical technologies, rehabilitative robotics, autonomous flight, airspace management, and systems biology.

Tremendous progress across industry and academia has advanced the theory and applications of control, robotics, and autonomous systems. The global robotics market is expected to reach $67 billion by 2025, with significant annual growth rates, according to industry analysis conducted by Boston Consulting Group. Autonomous vehicles are already on the road and in the air, while robots vacuum floors at home. Scientists explore the ocean with fleets of autonomous underwater vehicles. At hospitals, surgeons and engineers are supported by robotics to deliver minimally invasive medical interventions, diagnostics, and drug delivery. Veterans and many others benefit from advanced prosthetics. The comprehensive reviews in the Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems provide expert syntheses that cover decades of foundational research and assess the challenges and potential future directions of these fields.

On publishing the inaugural volume, the journal’s Editor, Dr. Naomi Ehrich Leonard, addressed her vision for the journal and the value of review articles in a highly multidisciplinary field:

“The opportunities are enormous for control, robotics, and autonomous systems to help make the world a better place. Search and rescue, environmental monitoring, surgical assistance, and smart grids are just a few high-impact applications. This journal provides a much-needed unifying forum for the richly varied and ever-evolving research that promotes creativity and advances control, robotics, and the engineering of autonomous systems. Researchers and practitioners alike will find the articles of great value in learning and integrating across the many interconnected disciplines that contribute to this fantastically exciting field.”

The control field features innovation, development, and application of methodologies for the design and analysis of autonomous system response to sensory feedback, with the aim of regulating the stability, speed, accuracy, efficiency, reliability, and robustness of autonomous system behavior. The robotics field features innovation, design, analysis, creation, operation, and application of robots from industrial to nano-scale, from the bottom of the ocean, to the inside of the human body, to the surface of Mars, and everywhere in between. To fully cover the research at the nexus of control, robotics, and autonomous systems, the journal’s articles connect to many related fields, including mechanics, optimization, communication, information theory, machine learning, computing, signal processing, human behavioral sciences, and biology.

Dr. Leonard, who is the Edwin S. Wilsey Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Princeton University, has been recognized as a MacArthur Fellow. She pursues collaborative, multidisciplinary research in control, dynamics, and robotics with engineers, oceanographers, biologists, and choreographers. She has explored the mechanisms that explain the collective dynamics of animal groups, including killifish, honeybees, caribou, and starlings, and has developed bio-inspired methodologies for control of robot teams. One of Dr. Leonard’s largest projects culminated in a field demonstration in Monterey Bay, California, of an autonomous ocean-observing system that featured a coordinated network of underwater robotic gliders.

The full volume, publishing online May 29, 2018, will be freely available online for an initial preview period.

Annual Reviews is a nonprofit publisher dedicated to synthesizing and integrating knowledge to stimulate the progress of science and benefit society. For more than 85 years, Annual Reviews has offered expert review journals which today span 50 titles across the biomedical, life, physical, and social sciences.  Annual Reviews launched Knowable Magazine in 2017, an open access digital magazine to explore the real-world significance of this highly cited scholarship and make it accessible to broad audiences.

Professor Stanley Falkow – 1934-2018 – father of molecular microbial pathogenesis

It is with sadness that we share the news that Professor Stanley Falkow of Stanford University School of Medicine, esteemed member of the editorial committee for the Annual Review of Microbiology, co-author of three review articles and an autobiographical article,  passed away (5th May 2018) at the age of 84.

Those of us who didn’t know Professor Falkow can get a vivid impression of him by reading his autobiographical article entitled: The Fortunate Professor. The title makes it clear that this was a man with an abundance of gratitude. The abstract of his article says simply:

My professional life can be summarized by a quote from the Talmud.

Much have I learned from my teachers,

More from my colleagues,

But most from my students.

It is the fortunate professor who learns from the student.

All of us at Annual Reviews feel equally fortunate to have Professor Falkow play a part in the success of our organization. Our thoughts go out to his family, friends, co-workers and of course his students, from whom he learned so much.

Waves, Satellites, and an Oceanographer at Sea: Annual Review of Marine Science Volume 10

Browse the Annual Review of Marine Science Volume 10 table of contents.

ma10-wavesThe Fate and Impact of Internal Waves in Nearshore Ecosystems” by C.B. Woodson introduced me to the wonder and science of internal waves.  Like the surface waves most people are accustomed to thinking about, these internal waves also break as they near land and can bring of deep offshore waters into the nearshore environment:

These deeper waters are often colder, lower in oxygen, higher in CO2 concentration (lower pH), and nutrient enriched. Consequently, internal waves can dramatically change the ambient environment, leading to either extreme oxygen (hypoxia) or pH (acidification) events. However, they can also mediate extreme heating events by providing a temporary reprieve from high temperatures. Deep offshore waters can also provide nutrients and food subsidies to nearshore ecosystems. Nutrient-deprived nearshore ecosystems, namely coral reefs, can be highly dependent on such subsidies.

ma-dugdaleRichard Dugdale credits mentoring with influencing his path from electrical engineering to oceanographer in his autobiography “A Biogeochemical Oceanographer at Sea: My Life with Nitrogen and a Nod to Silica” He has a warm writing style and I enjoyed reading about the history of this field through his experiences, especially about the changing technology:

…this field rapidly developed both analytically, starting with the use of stable and radioactive tracers, and computationally, from the use of slide rules to the development of onboard computers with disk drives (with 250 KB of storage!) and the era of smartphones. Also changing has been the mode of communication between oceanographers—from handwritten or mimeographed notes to faxes to the early email and Internet (telemail) used by oceanographers in the 1980s to today’s email and social media. What follows, then, is a biased (biological/chemical) history of a period in which modern oceanography was largely developed and in which I had the great fortune to be a player.

Spaceborne Lidar in the Study of Marine Systems” by Hostetler et al. is one of several articles in this volume that report on the use of satellites in marine research. This article reviews the use of passive color analysis to observe chlorophyll levels among many other topics and looks forward to an upcoming PACE mission which pairs the color observations with new tools:

Satellite passive ocean color observations have vastly improved our understanding of global links between biodiversity, ecosystem structure, and ma10-satsecological and biogeochemical function. However, there are fundamental geophysical properties that simply cannot be characterized with ocean color technology alone. Addressing these issues requires additional tools in space. For example, the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, and Marine Ecosystem (PACE) mission aims to co-deploy a multi-angle polarimeter with a hyperspectral ocean color sensor, with the polarimetry enabling more accurate atmospheric corrections and advanced characterization of ocean particle types. Here, we describe how even greater synergies may be achieved by combining a passive ocean color sensor with an ocean-optimized satellite profiling lidar.

 

Annual Review of Psychology Volume 69: Language, Gender, and Replication

Browse the Annual Review of Psychology Volume 69 table of contents.

ps69-langWhile I’m used to thinking about language as a way of gauging cognitive development “Linking Language and Cognition in Infancy” by Perszyk and Waxman had me thinking about the ways language influences cognition. For instance:

…more recent developmental evidence reveals that, even before infants begin to speak, words invite them to form categories. The evidence for this claim comes from a robust behavioral paradigm, elegant in its simplicity. It is essentially an object categorization task with two phases. During the familiarization phase, infants view a series of discriminably different objects (e.g., dog, horse, duck) from a given object category (e.g., animal). Next, during the test phase, infants view two new objects—one a member of the now-familiar category (e.g., a cat) and the other a member of an entirely different category (e.g., an apple). The logic of this paradigm is straightforward: If infants detect the category-based commonalities among the familiarization objects, then they should distinguish the novel test image from the familiar; if they fail to detect these commonalities, then they should perform at chance levels ….The evidence reveals that, by 12 months of age, even before they produce more than a few words on their own, infants have established a principled link between object naming and object categorization.

I found  “Gender Stereotypes” by Ellemers  quite an interesting read.  I particularly responded to the summation in the section “How We Can Benefit From This Knowledge”:

Gender stereotypes prevent women and men from equally sharing the care for children and family members and from equally benefiting from the interpersonal connections made through these activities. Gender stereotypes prevent women with successful careers from finding a romantic partner and men without employment from feeling valued. They cause us to underestimate the emotional burden of care functions for women and the physical burden of strenuous labor for men. This is not only costly for the individuals ps69-genderinvolved but also for society, as it impacts the psychological and physical well-being of individuals, the resilience of families, and the long-term availability and contributions of workers in the labor market. We are only human and have to accept that we are subject to stereotypical thinking and gendered expectations. Accepting our fallibility in this way, rather than denying that gender stereotypes play a role while implicitly reproducing them, makes it easier to correct for any undesired outcomes that may result.

Shrout and Rodgers’ article “ Psychology, Science, and Knowledge Construction: Broadening Perspectives from the Replication Crisis” is a good overview of the history of evaluating results, the problems with current practices, and steps that have been taken to verify findings.  I was particularly interested in how the changes in research procedure have affected scientists:

As calls have been made to change the way science is conducted in psychology by preregistering designs and analyses and increasing sample sizes, some authors have noted what might be called collateral damage. The three types of damage that have been identified are (a) slowing and ultimate reduction of new findings and phenomena, (b) penalizing different subfields with the imposition of one-size-fits-all norms, and (c) discouraging young scientists from staying in the field because of the higher bar for publication and professional advancement.