Working groups, gender, and publication impact of Canada’s ecology and evolution faculty

Working groups are recognized as a highly effective method for synthesizing science. It is less clear if participating in working groups benefits individual researchers, or if benefits differ between men and women. This is a critical question, for the working group method is not sustainable if the benefit to science comes at a cost to academic careers or gender equity. Here we analyze the publications of Canadian university faculty specialized in ecology and evolution ( N = 1244), a field that has embraced the working group method. Researchers were more likely to have participated in a working group as their academic age and prior H-index increased, but controlling for these factors there was no effect of gender. Using a longitudinal analysis, we find that researcher H-indices accrue 14% faster following their first working group publication, regardless of gender. Part of this acceleration may be the 3- to 5-fold higher citation rate of working group synthesis publications. In a survey ( N = 169), researchers also report indirect benefits of working groups, at similar rates for men and women. Working groups are therefore good not just for science but also for scientists. Formalized mechanisms for collaborations such as working groups may also offset gender inequities in science.