Summer Kim: Women in STEM

Throughout history, brilliant minds and their world-changing discoveries have shaped the course of science. However, for many women in STEM, their contributions have gone unnoticed as their male counterparts are credited. This pattern, known as the Matilda Effect, results in female scientists’ contributions being minimized while others receive the recognition. Named after Matilda Joslyn Gage, a progressive activist who published the first known history of women scientists written by an American woman, the Matilda Effect has persisted across countless generations, obscuring the work of numerous female scientists.

In the 30s, Lise Meitner, an Austrian-Swedish physicist, played a significant role in the uncovering of nuclear fission by theorizing that the uranium nucleus had split in half, then coining the process “fission.” Despite her major involvement in the discovery, her colleague, Otto Hahn, whom she had worked closely with, was the only one to be awarded the 1944 Nobel Prize. Today, Meitner is often called the “mother of nuclear power,” yet her work is far less recognized than Hahn's. 

Only a decade later, another woman’s work proved instrumental in a scientific breakthrough. The chemist Rosalind Franklin captured Photo 51, the key piece of evidence that revealed DNA’s double-helix structure. However, Maurice Wilkins, James Watson, and Francis Crick, three of her colleagues, accessed Franklin’s findings without her permission, using them to finalize their famous model of DNA that won them their 1962 Nobel Prize. Franklin, who had passed away four years before the prize was awarded, was never celebrated by the committee. 

Unfortunately, this trend of sidelining women in science didn’t stop in the 20th century, and the Matilda Effect persists even in modern times. One evident example is the biochemist Katalin Karikó, whose decades of research on mRNA technology became the foundations for the COVID 19 vaccines. Even though her work had revolutionary potential, her ideas were seen as too unconventional, and she faced repeated dismissals, grant rejections, and lack of recognition from the science community. However, when the pandemic struck, her work became the basis for developing the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, saving millions of lives worldwide. Even then, public recognition was slow until Karikó and her collaborator, Drew Weissman, received the 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Karikó’s story is a rare case of belated acknowledgement, but it demonstrates a recurring reality: Women in STEM are often forced to fight far harder than their male colleagues to have their work taken seriously.

Much of this erasure is due to the structure of scientific recognition. Many of the most prestigious prizes in science have historically overlooked women. For the Nobel Prize in scientific fields, only 25 women have ever been awarded, compared to over 600 men. Beyond awards, women’s research is referenced less frequently than men’s, and male scientists are often represented as the face of outstanding discoveries. Men have also held the majority of leadership positions in research institutions, a factor that can lead to institutional bias as it provides more influence over which discoveries are brought to the forefront. This results in women’s contributions remaining undervalued while simultaneously making it more difficult for future female scientists to gain the recognition they rightly deserve.

Women also remain underrepresented in many STEM fields, particularly physics, engineering, and computer science, where they often face barriers. Certain studies show that female scientists, on average, receive less funding for research than males, restricting the advancement of their work. Fewer female role models in textbooks and media can affect young aspiring scientists, discouraging girls from pursuing careers in STEM.

But progress is happening. Efforts to highlight historical injustices have helped bring long overdue credit to women such as Rosalind Franklin, whose role in DNA research is becoming increasingly recognized. These efforts appear to be making an impact– for example, one study states that more students now picture women when asked to draw a scientist.

It’s important to remember that even with these improvements, challenges remain. Ensuring proper credit for the work of these remarkable women requires not only celebrating past achievements but also structural changes in how research is funded, published, and recognized. By challenging bias and amplifying female voices in science, we can create a future where groundbreaking discoveries are credited not based on gender, but on merit alone, and not decades too late.

About the Author:

Summer Kim is a 14-year-old student from Massachusetts. She has a deep passion for design, science, and community service, and has enjoyed writing from a young age.