Immigrant Scientists Research Articles

Biology, technology and a bit of serendipity: an interview with Shiva Malek.

Biology, technology and a bit of serendipity: an interview with Shiva Malek.

Dissecting culture at work: Conversation with Indian immigrant scientists & engineers in the US industrial sector

Scientists and engineers’ social background, cultural upbringing, educational training, and world outlook influence how they perform the work and interact with their colleagues. We conducted a study on Indian immigrant scientists and engineers employed in the US industrial sector. We interviewed 40 Indian immigrant scientists and engineers, some of whom came for higher studies and found employment after graduation, while others came directly from India to work. Findings show that the overwhelming majority of interviewees (n = 35) noted significant cultural differences with their colleagues in the workplace; only a small number of interviewees (n = 5), believed that their foundation in professionalism eliminated significant impacts from cultural dissimilarities. Interviewees identified cultural differences in the areas of social interactions, work-related practices, intercultural communication, and management. When immigrant scientists and engineers from developing countries join industrial organizations, they do not leave their cultural practices at home. A conversation with Indian immigrant scientists and engineers shows how Indian culture manifests itself in the workplace.

MIGRATION OF SCIENTISTS IN THE GROWTH OF THE POTENTIAL OF SCIENTIFIC AND EDUCATIONAL SPACE: LESSONS OF EU AND US COUNTRIES

Such a phenomenon as the migration of scientists can be considered from different points of view. In particular, some scholars share the view that this is a negative aspect in the development of the scientific and educational space of a particular country, while others believe that with the right migration policy, it can greatly strengthen the competitiveness of the country that scientists leave. The aim of the article is to highlight the latest trends in the policies of various EU and US countries, as well as to develop practical recommendations for the implementation of some aspects of Ukraine's migration policy for such a category as scientists. The main research method is a comparative analysis, which allows to clearly identify the advantages and disadvantages of each migration policy of each country. The migration of scientists can be used by a single university to establish strong communication with those universities that accept immigrant scientists, which will only be useful for building their future relationships. The article also identifies the advantages and disadvantages of such a phenomenon as the migration of scientists. The definition of virtual migration is given and its main forms and directions are determined. The article considers and compares the migration of scientists and the migration of engineers on the example of Great Britain. It is proved that foreign scientists often occupy positions in those fields where domestic specialists for various reasons do not want to work. The experience of Lithuania has proved the possibility of successful cooperation, which goes beyond the individual level to the level of cooperation with foreign universities. And this was facilitated by the tendency to digitalize various processes. It has been determined that scientists belong to one of the most traveling professions, and many scientists cross borders in search of opportunities. Their state of affairs is explained primarily by an adventurous spirit and a thirst for constant search, which is developed in scientists. Moreover, it is simply the nature of the work - usually, depending on the topic, only a dozen scientists can deeply understand a narrow study - not to mention to help advance it, so scientists are forced to migrate around the world. Upon completion, a number of measures are proposed to increase the potential for cooperation between scientists of Ukrainian origin around the world.

Profile of Xiaowei Zhuang, winner of the 2020 Vilcek Prize in Biomedical Science

In 2006, the New York City-based Vilcek Foundation created an annual prize program for foreign-born biomedical scientists who have made major contributions to their fields while living and working in the United States. The founders, themselves immigrants from Czechoslovakia, established the program to raise public awareness of the indispensable role of immigrant scientists in ensuring the United States’ leadership on the world science stage. Recipients currently receive a cash award and commemorative sculpture designed by New York-based graphic designer Stefan Sagmeister. Over the past 15 years, scientists born in 12 different countries have been selected by a jury of peers to receive Vilcek Prizes, illustrating the diversity of backgrounds of immigrant scientists in the United States who become leaders in their fields of study. In 2009 the prize program was expanded to include a second tier of prizes, Vilcek Prizes for Creative Promise, for a younger generation of foreign-born biomedical scientists who have risen to prominence among peers through noteworthy early-career accomplishments. Vilcek Prizes for Creative Promise include a cash award and commemorative plaque. Currently, three recipients are chosen each year to receive Vilcek Prizes for Creative Promise (The Foundation also honors outstanding immigrants working in the arts and humanities through a parallel track of the prize program). Fig. 1. Xiaowei Zhuang receiving the 2019 Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences. Image credit: Breakthrough Prize Foundation and Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences Foundation. Fig. 2. MPS in neurons revealed by STORM. Image credit: the Xiaowei Zhuang Laboratory. Fig. 3. Cell atlas of the preoptic region in mouse brain generated by MERFISH. Image credit: the Xiaowei Zhuang and Catherine Dulac Laboratories. Fig. 4. MERFISH images of RNAs from 10,050 genes in individual cells. Image credit: the Xiaowei Zhuang Laboratory. The 2020 Vilcek Prize in biomedical science has been awarded to Chinese-born Xiaowei Zhuang, a biophysicist at Harvard University, for her … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: pnair{at}nas.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

Steps needed to keep immigrant scientists welcome

Experts discuss importance of foreign-born researchers at AAAS Annual Meeting

Earnings of foreign-born doctoral engineers in the United States: intersectionality of citizenship status and gender

Foreign-born scientists and engineers in the United States make significant contributions to their fields. While some studies of their career outcomes investigate the internal differences among immigrant scientists and engineers, there is little scholarly attention to how immigration status and gender work together in shaping their career outcomes. This study employs the intersectionality framework and uses National Science Foundation’s Survey of Doctorate Recipients 2008, 2010, 2013, 2015, and 2017 to examine how citizenship status and the intersection of citizenship status and gender affect earnings among engineers with doctoral degrees. Findings show that naturalized U.S. citizens do not earn less than comparable native-born citizens, but permanent residents and temporary residents do. In terms of intersectional effects, U.S.-born women experience an earnings disadvantage due to their gender, naturalized U.S. citizen women and permanent resident women face earnings disadvantages because of both citizenship status and gender, and temporary resident women earn less because of their citizenship status. The preceding findings persisted in the period of study with one exception. These findings reveal the internal variations among foreign-born engineers, intersectional effects of citizenship status and gender, and the complexity and persistence of these effects, suggesting the intersectional and enduring nature of inequality.

Avoiding immigration limbo.

“Banks won't give a mortgage loan to someone who is only going to be in the country for 1 year,” declared the real estate agent. His remark shocked me. I was a tenure-track faculty member at the time, but I was deemed unworthy to receive a line of credit because of my visa situation. I'm a citizen of the Philippines, and the visa that my U.S. institution obtained for me had to be renewed each year. So, on paper it looked as though I only had permission to be in the country for 1 year. My wife and I encountered many such hurdles because of my visa—and they ultimately drove me to quit my faculty position and leave the country. ![][1] ILLUSTRATION: ROBERT NEUBECKER > “Don't sign … until you know that you'll have what you need in your new country.” In hindsight, I didn't take the visa application process seriously enough when I was negotiating my job offer. I was so excited about landing a tenure-track position that I didn't take time to think through what kind of visa and accommodations I would need to make my personal life work. I also assumed that the university had a system in place to deal with foreign hires. I said yes to the job offer and signed on the dotted line. The first sign of trouble came when I tried to buy a house in our new city. I had moved there ahead of my wife and 1-year-old daughter so that I could look for a neighborhood where we could settle down. But as the real estate agent predicted, mortgage lenders didn't want to gamble on someone with a 1-year visa. I signed a lease for an apartment instead. After my wife joined me, we needed a car because our sprawling community didn't have a strong public transportation system. But we had trouble securing credit for that, too. In the end, we had to put down more than $3000 as a down payment. The third, and final, straw came when my wife wanted to return to her work as a nurse after her maternity leave. Prior to our move, she had obtained a license to practice nursing in the United States. But she couldn't apply for jobs because of legal restrictions associated with my visa. That left her feeling frustrated and isolated, unable to establish a professional life in a new country. Stress ran high in our small one-bedroom apartment. The logical fix to our problems was for me to secure permanent residency status, otherwise known as a green card. But that just brought more problems. I pleaded with my department chair, dean, and provost to support my green card application. But it took 6 months for the university to agree to sponsor my application, and I didn't know how long the review and approval process would take on top of that. Exasperated by the entire ordeal, I applied for jobs in countries that I thought would be more supportive of foreign workers and their families. I was offered a faculty job in the Netherlands and, within 3 months, my family and I moved across the Atlantic. That was 1 year ago, and we've been much happier ever since. My wife, who is allowed to work in the Netherlands, is completing a course toward a nursing certification while our daughter, now 3 years old, is at government-subsidized day care. We are renting a nice house and are looking for one to buy. And we've been helped by a government policy that grants a 30% tax exemption for foreign hires for a period of 5 years. I'm glad we've ended up where we are. But when I look back, I wish that I'd been more prepared and proactive when negotiating my first faculty position. I could have asked the university to apply for a multiyear visa—which, I later learned, is what human resources staff had done for other faculty hires. I could have also requested a guarantee that the university would sponsor my application for permanent residency within a certain period of time and would pay for some immigration-related expenses, such as green card application fees. I hope that other immigrant scientists take heed from my tale. If you land a job, don't sign on the dotted line until you know that you'll have what you need in your new country. [1]: /embed/graphic-1.gif

Cancer researcher defends immigrant scientists.

Ashani Weeraratna describes harassment she has faced and how current US immigration policies affect biomedical science. Ashani Weeraratna describes harassment she has faced and how current US immigration policies affect biomedical science.

The Influence of Birth Country on Selection of Conference Destination - Employing Natural Language Processing

This study deals with immigrant scientists integrated in academia in Israel. Studies on the subject indicate the contribution of immigrant scientists to research. The current study focuses on the influence of scientists' birth country on selecting destinations for academic conferences, as well as on the influence of one's native language on the academic output resulting from research conferences. This is a pilot study exploring the effect of academic conferences from the perspective of birth country - comparing Israeli born and USSR born academics - on the motivation of faculty members to attend conferences, the nature of the conferences they select, the differences between Israeli natives and non-natives with regard to how their perceive the influence of conferences and their contribution to their academic work. This research offers a case study, investigating the effect of scholars from two different countries and cultural background, Israel and USSR. This pioneering research provides the grounds for many extensions, studies that will investigate the impact of other countries and their effect on conference selection. The study addresses a case study of a single university in Israel that absorbed many immigrant scientists from the former USSR in the 1990s. Ninety-four academic faculty members from various departments answered the questionnaire, of them 60.9% women and 39.1% men. Faculty members referred to the conference's contribution with regard to their professional development. In addition, the greater inclination of Israeli researchers than researchers born in the USSR to take their family members with them when travelling for conferences was noted. Since the contribution of immigrant scientists was found to be significant and since academic conferences are a significant part of the work of faculty members and receive considerable funds from academic institutions, the research findings might illuminate the choice of conferences by immigrant scientists and their preferences - compared to native born scientists - with the purpose of examining whether conferences are perceived by Israeli born faculty members as productive.

Standing up to fear.

In 2014, after years of planning, I finally got my visa to start my Ph.D. studies in the United States. I chose to come to this country—leaving behind my family and other loved ones in Iran—because I thought it would be the best way to grow as a scientist. I also felt I could be happy in a country built on a foundation of freedom, tolerance, and diversity. And that was pretty much the case for the first 2 years of graduate school, when I focused on my science, excited to be investing in my career and my personal growth. But the new U.S. president and the climate he has fostered have changed everything for me and people like me, and I need to speak out. ![Figure][1] ILLUSTRATION: ROBERT NEUBECKER > “The new U.S. president and the climate he has fostered have changed everything.” Casual interactions now make me feel unwelcome and unsafe. When the first attempted travel ban was announced, for example, a conversation with one of my former students—whom I had always had a good relationship with—turned to politics. I said that this country promises religious freedom for everyone. “Not for you, only for U.S. citizens,” he responded, adding that he supported the travel ban because he does not think that people with “different beliefs” should be allowed in this country. I was shocked at his ignorance of the law, and hurt that he seemed so eager to take away my rights. In a similar conversation about the effects of anti-immigrant sentiment, someone whom I had considered a friend told me bluntly that if I left an American would take my place—implying that this outcome would be preferable. I never heard any comments like these before the election, but now they're common. And I am not alone. I am in touch with international students across the country who are also facing this type of hostility in various forms and are afraid. We are dealing with practical and logistical issues too. Even though the travel ban is currently blocked by the court, uncertainty about what will happen if we travel outside the United States is a major concern. Some of my Iranian friends who don't have funding for the summer had planned to go back home; now they worry that they might not be readmitted to this country if they leave. In the long term, if I cannot even go abroad for a conference, I will effectively be a prisoner in the United States because I cannot risk losing my position. Moreover, most of my network will be in the United States, so as my career progresses, it will be hard to get a job elsewhere. We need our institutions to support us as we confront these challenges. The best way to make this happen at my own university, I thought, would be to talk to our new interim president, whom I met at a reception. I worried that he would already know everything I wanted to tell him, making it a waste of time for both of us. But I believe that his job is to serve the students, so I felt it was important to reach out. It turns out that he was not aware of the deep fear among international students and our desperate need for support. He agreed to meet with me a few more times, and I was happy to have the opportunity to share my experience and the challenges that students like me are facing. Raising my concerns did not produce the immediate, concrete results that I hoped for, such as a strong statement in support of international students. Even so, I'm happy that I took the initiative. Administrators need to know that the current uncertainty will harm their students. U.S. institutions will keep admitting international students, and it is crucial that they develop and implement plans to protect and nurture us. I am considering leaving the United States to find a better place to build my life and career. But for as long as I'm here, I plan to stand up for immigrant scientists so that, hopefully soon, I can again spend my time thinking about scientific problems instead of my country of origin, my religion, or the color of my skin. [1]: pending:yes

Profile of Lily and Yuh Nung Jan, winners of the 2017 Vilcek Prize in Biomedical Science

The 2017 Vilcek Prize in Biomedical Science has been awarded to Lily Y. Jan and Yuh Nung Jan, professors in the department of physiology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), and Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators. The Jans are being recognized for demonstrating how ion channels contribute to neuronal signaling and how neurons acquire their cell fates and morphologies. Lily and Yuh Nung Jan. Image courtesy of Cindy Chew (photographer). Side view of a Drosophila larva, with body wall innervated by two types of sensory neurons (green and red). Image courtesy of Chun Han (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY). Dendritic arbor of Drosophila larval neuron. Image courtesy of Lily and Yuh Nung Jan. Vilcek Prizes—accompanied by an unrestricted cash award of $100,000 each—have been awarded annually since 2006 to prominent foreign-born biomedical scientists and artists. To recognize a younger generation of distinguished immigrant scientists, in 2009 the Vilcek Foundation also established annual Prizes for Creative Promise in Biomedical Science. Currently, three scientists, 38 years of age or younger, are selected for the latter awards, each carrying a cash prize of $50,000. The Jans are the first Chinese-born scientists to receive the main biomedical prize awarded by the Foundation. Today, numerous Chinese American scientists play invaluable roles in science and technology in the United States. By contrast, when the Jans arrived in this country in 1968 to pursue graduate studies, there were few scientists of Chinese origin in laboratories in this country. Perhaps even more significantly, the 2017 Vilcek Prizes reflect the fact that the proportion of foreign-born researchers among highly accomplished American scientists greatly exceeds the fraction of foreign-born people living in the United States. The remarkable achievements of these scientists attest to the vital and well-documented role of immigrants in sustaining the American economy. Beginning in 1979, neurologist … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: pnair{at}nas.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

Scientific Diaspora: Stay Plans of Indian Faculty in the United States

In recent years, the “brain drain” experienced by developing countries, as their scientists and engineers chose to work and live permanently in developed countries, is seen as reversing. Although a reverse brain drain is projected as a new trend, a substantial number of immigrant scientists and engineers continue to work and live in developed countries. This paper presents the reasons why Indian faculty in science and engineering stay in the United States. Data for this study come from 51 in-depth interviews of faculty members of Indian origin working in various research universities across theus. Findings show that, although Indian faculty came to theusfor higher education without intending to become permanent residents, they chose to stay mostly due to the research opportunities, favorable work environments, career prospects and lifestyle preferences available in theus. They cope with the absence of family and cultural distance through periodic visits to India and by developing professional relationships with scientists and engineers in their home country—activities that facilitate transnational migration. The study adds validity to the international migration theory, which has not taken this particular group of faculty into consideration.

The Sociable Sciences: Darwin and His Contemporaries in Chile

The Sociable Sciences: Darwin and His Contemporaries in Chile

A Cultural Analysis of China’s Scientific Brain Drain: the Case of Chinese Immigrant Scientists in Canadian Academia

While the booming market and policy incentives of China are reversing the pattern of talent flow across the Pacific, a large proportion of the mainland Chinese immigrant scientists currently in Canadian academia have decided not to return home; meanwhile, their interactions with China in terms of brain circulation are not extensive overall. This study attempts to explore the key factors for the paradox of China’s scientific brain drain through the lens of culture, drawing on data mainly from in-depth interviews with 14 mainland Chinese immigrant scientists in Canadian academia. The theoretical framework derives from the models of cultural negotiation (Sakamoto 2001) and bidimensional acculturation (Berry, Appl Psychol 46: 5–34, 1997). Data analysis reveals that cultural factors override everything else in shaping the leave–stay decision and brain exchange behavior of these Chinese scientists, who have gone through a cultural negotiation and construction process. With a transformed perspective, these academic migrants hold firmly the new culture’s beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors; therefore, the work styles, notions, and ethics of their counterparts in China have cultural limitations and are incongruent with their practice in Canada. Meanwhile, they have been significantly influenced by Chinese cultural values, notably group orientation, hierarchy loving, self-abasement, harmony seeking, face saving, etc. The findings should shed some light on public policies aiming to realize the full value of top talents for the benefits of China, Canada, and beyond.

Foreign minds, fenceless imagination: The 2013 Vilcek Foundation Prizes

Every year, the White House announces the winners of the National Medal of Science and the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. Awarded during a special ceremony by the president, these medals represent the highest honors bestowed by the United States government on scientists and engineers. In his address during the White House awards ceremony in the fall of 2011, President Obama noted that nine of the 12 honorees were born outside of the U.S. (1). The winners came to the U.S., he said, because “America is the best place in the world to do the work they do.” At a time when immigration counts as an issue of pressing political currency, the importance of foreign-born scientists to the U.S. biomedical research enterprise bears repeating: the proportion of foreign-born researchers among recipients of high honors bestowed on American scientists typically exceeds the percentage of foreign-born people living in the U.S., which—including undocumented aliens—hovers around 13% of the general population (2). In fact, at least one in three scientists honored with the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for work done in the U.S. during the past century was born outside of the country (3). The United States is a nation of immigrants, and most Americans are proud of their ancestral roots. Nevertheless, a significant portion of the populace subscribes to the view that new immigrants are a burden on the country’s economy. To raise public awareness of the invaluable contribution of immigrants to science in America, the Vilcek Foundation initiated an annual program of prizes to recognize accomplished foreign-born biomedical scientists who are widely regarded as leaders in their fields (Table 1). Currently, each of these prizes includes a cash award of $100,000 (3–5). To recognize a younger generation of distinguished immigrant scientists, the Vilcek Foundation established annual Prizes for Creative Promise in 2009; to be eligible, applicants must be 38 years of age or younger (4–5). In 2013, three winners of the Prize for Creative Promise in Biomedical Science were selected, and each winner was awarded a cash prize of $35,000 (Table 2). Similarly, the Vilcek Foundation (5) confers annual prizes on prominent, foreign-born artists for outstanding achievement in various artistic endeavors. This year, the Vilcek Prize in Biomedical Science is shared by immunologists Richard Flavell and Ruslan Medzhitov, both Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators in the Department of Immunobiology at Yale University.

International scientific collaboration of China: collaborating countries, institutions and individuals

Using bibliometric methods, we investigate China's international scientific collaboration from 3 levels of collaborating countries, institutions and individuals. We design a database in SQL Server, and make analysis of Chinese SCI papers based on the corresponding author field. We find that China's international scientific collaboration is focused on a handful of countries. Nearly 95% international co-authored papers are collaborated with only 20 countries, among which the USA account for more than 40% of all. Results also show that Chinese lineage in the international co-authorship is obvious, which means Chinese immigrant scientists are playing an important role in China's international scientific collaboration, especially in English-speaking countries.

Place of education, gender disparity, and assimilation of immigrant scientists and engineers earnings

Many existing studies have demonstrated the earnings disadvantage of immigrants in U.S. labor market. When examining the mechanism of such disadvantage, previous research has pointed to the factor of lower human capital as a portion of immigrants completed their education before immigration. This study builds on the previous research and further investigates both place of college and where they completed education on the earnings among immigrant scientists and engineers. In addition to the human capital, this study captures factors pertaining to acculturation. Using data from Scientists and Engineers Statistical Data System (SESTAT), I divide the immigrant scientists and engineers into fully foreign-educated, fully U.S.-educated and mixed foreign- and U.S.-educated groups. These categories are regressed against the native-born in a full sample and subsamples of men and women, respectively. The full-sample analysis shows that immigrant scientists and engineers who have received their college education abroad are at an earnings disadvantage, regardless of whether they completed their higher degrees in or outside the United States. However, their earnings can rise faster than their native-born peers if they completed their education in the United States. The results suggest that attending college and/or pre-college in U.S. plays a more substantial role in closing the earnings gap between immigrants and non-immigrants among scientists and engineers. Gender-specific analyses reveal that the earnings gap between immigrants and native-born women is narrower than that between their male counterparts, showing gender may play a more salient role in earnings disadvantage than immigrant status.

Breakthrough inventions and migrating clusters of innovation

We investigate the speed at which clusters of invention for a technology migrate spatially following breakthrough inventions. We identify breakthrough inventions as the top 1% of US inventions for a technology during 1975–1984 in terms of subsequent citations. Patenting growth is significantly higher in cities and technologies where breakthrough inventions occur after 1984 relative to peer locations that do not experience breakthrough inventions. This growth differential in turn depends on the mobility of the technology’s labor force, which we model through the extent that technologies depend upon immigrant scientists and engineers. Spatial adjustments are faster for technologies that depend heavily on immigrant inventors. The results qualitatively confirm the mechanism of industry migration proposed in models like Duranton [Duranton, G., 2007. Urban evolutions: The fast, the slow, and the still. American Economic Review 97, 197–221].

Israeli immigrant scientists protest threat to jobs

Israeli immigrant scientists protest threat to jobs

Breakthrough Inventions and Migrating Clusters of Innovation

We investigate the speed at which clusters of invention for a technology migrate spatially following breakthrough inventions. We identify breakthrough inventions as the top one percent of US inventions for a technology during 1975-1984 in terms of subsequent citations. Patenting growth is significantly higher in cities and technologies where breakthrough inventions occur after 1984 relative to peer locations that do not experience breakthrough inventions. This growth differential in turn depends on the mobility of the technology’s labor force, which we model through the extent that technologies depend upon immigrant scientists and engineers. Spatial adjustments are faster for technologies that depend heavily on immigrant inventors. The results qualitatively con.rm the mechanism of industry migration proposed in models like [Duranton, G., 2007. Urban evolutions: The fast, the slow, and the still. American Economic Review 97, 197.221].