IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0276201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflicting ’mother-scientist’ roles. An innovative application of basket analysis in social research

Author

Listed:
  • Ewa Krause
  • Renata Tomaszewska
  • Aleksandra Pawlicka

Abstract

The article discusses the issue of career and motherhood of female scientists, which is part of a broader thematic area known as Work-Life Balance. The theoretical part refers to the social role theory and the mutual influence of work and career on family and motherhood. The situation of women scientists is presented, for whom fulfilling the role of a mother is an important, although natural barrier on the road to a scientific career. Previous analyses present in the literature revealed that for the vast majority of mothers-scientists, motherhood is a factor that significantly delays their plans related to the development of a scientific career. The paper presents the results of empirical research conducted on the basis of classical academic methodology. Then, based on the data obtained from 334 mothers-scientists, an innovative, multidisciplinary experiment using data mining solutions was conducted, to answer the research question: Is the basket analysis tool able to find possible correlations between the factors characterising the respondents, and the types and dimensions of conflict occurring between scientific career and motherhood they experience? The paper shows that, according to the study results, most respondents declare they indeed experience the conflict between the roles of a mother and a scientist. The most frequently declared dimension of the conflict is the time-related one, then subsequently the emotional dimension, and lastly the financial dimension; many scientists declare they experience more than one dimension of conflict. Lastly, the basket analysis tool objectively confirmed the occurrence of correlations between the factors characterising the respondents and the types and dimensions of conflict occurring between scientific career and motherhood.

Suggested Citation

  • Ewa Krause & Renata Tomaszewska & Aleksandra Pawlicka, 2022. "Conflicting ’mother-scientist’ roles. An innovative application of basket analysis in social research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-27, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0276201
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0276201
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0276201&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0276201?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2024. "Gender bias in team formation: the case of the European Science Foundation’s grants," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 247-260.
    2. Liu, Xiaotian & Popkowski Leszczyc, Peter T.L., 2023. "The reference price effect of historical price lists in online auctions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Katrin Hussinger & João N. Carvalho, 2022. "The long-term effect of research grants on the scientific output of university professors," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 463-487, April.
    4. Lawson, Cornelia & Salter, Ammon, 2023. "Exploring the effect of overlapping institutional applications on panel decision-making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    5. Yang Ding & Fernando Moreira, 2025. "Funding and productivity: Does winning grants affect the scientific productivity of recipients? Evidence from the social sciences and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(3), pages 1831-1870, March.
    6. Xiaohong Wang & Jiyang Zhao & Ben Zhang, 2025. "The “leaky pipeline” in the academic growth: evidence from excellent young scientists of the NSFC," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(2), pages 1129-1158, February.
    7. Bol, Thijs & de Vaan, Mathijs & van de Rijt, Arnout, 2022. "Gender-equal funding rates conceal unequal evaluations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    8. Stefano Bianchini & Patrick Llerena & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Emre Özel, 2022. "Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Valentina Diana Rusu & Mihaela Mocanu & Anca-Diana Bibiri, 2022. "Determining factors of participation and success rates in research funding competitions: Case study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-17, July.
    10. Plantec, Quentin & Cabanes, Benjamin & le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoit, 2023. "Early-career academic engagement in university–industry collaborative PhDs: Research orientation and project performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0276201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.