The image of a chemist is often shaped by stereotypes, such as the “mad scientist” with white hair working in a laboratory. However, new research from Florida International University (FIU) suggests that these traditional views may limit who feels they belong in the field.
Sonia Underwood, associate professor in FIU’s Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, has published a study titled “Identity Development in Chemistry: The Social Functionality and Moral Significance of Being (Considered) a ‘Real’ Chemist” in ACS Publications. The research highlights the need to expand the definition of what it means to be a chemist beyond conventional academic roles and to encourage recognition of diverse career paths.
Underwood notes that chemistry majors have declined by 25 percent over the past five years, compared to a three percent decline in other STEM fields, according to data from C&EN News by the American Chemical Society. She argues that promoting varied applications of chemistry and emphasizing the range of skills acquired through a chemistry degree are crucial for attracting and retaining students.
The study was conducted with graduate student Giselle Castano as part of FIU’s STEM Transformation Institute. It examines how stereotypes about “real” chemists—typically those engaged in molecular-level research within academia—affect individuals pursuing careers outside this narrow definition.
“Chemistry plays a role in everything we have,” Underwood said. She pointed out that chemists contribute to areas such as paints, flavors, fragrances, fertilizers, and many other products essential to society. Despite not fitting the stereotype of someone working exclusively in an academic lab setting, these professionals perform vital work.
“If we can identify what creates barriers to identification and belonging, we can work toward making chemistry more welcoming and effective at retaining the diverse talent it needs,” Castano said.
During their research, Underwood and Castano found that participants often described an idealized “pure chemist” as someone with a chemistry degree conducting molecular-level research at an academic institution—usually focusing on organic or inorganic chemistry rather than biochemistry or industrial applications.
“What makes this stereotype powerful isn’t just that it exists, but that it functions as the measuring stick for legitimacy in the field,” Castano said. “It creates a hierarchy where theoretical, bench chemistry in academic settings is seen as more rigorous and ‘real’ than applied or interdisciplinary work.”
Castano compared this perception to debates over what constitutes “real music,” where some might value classical music over jazz or electronic genres. Those outside traditional academic roles often feel excluded despite their contributions.
“This hierarchy doesn’t just rank different types of chemistry—it determines who gets respect, recognition, and opportunities in the field,” Castano said. “This narrow definition excludes many talented people doing important work, simply because they don’t fit the traditional mold.”
The researchers found that industry professionals sometimes encounter negative perceptions about their career choices due to these stereotypes. Underwood emphasized supporting individuals regardless of their chosen path or area of research.
“Although change is slow, institutions are making progress by promoting collaboration across different research areas,” Underwood said.
Their paper concludes with reflection questions designed to encourage dialogue about how value is assigned within the discipline.
“This isn’t about implementing a policy overnight—it’s about creating space for honest examination of how we assign value to different types of chemistry work and whether those standards align with the inclusive, interdisciplinary community we claim to want,” Castano said.
