orgtheory.net

gender bias in the academy

Arguments about the place of women in science often focus on whether gatekeepers treat men and women equally. Over time, there is emerging evidence that gatekeepers do not treat young scholars equally. Consider the following article from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Corinne A. Moss-Racusin, John F. Dovidio, Victoria L. Brescoll, Mark J. Graham, and Jo Handelsman:

Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.

Bottom line: Experimental evidence indicates that women face a tax in the science careeer pipeline, which likely suppresses their numbers.

Adverts: From Black Power/Grad Skool Rulz

Written by fabiorojas

September 25, 2012 at 12:01 am

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I agree with the conclusions, so it would seem moot to point out that the small sample (n = 127) cannot be “a broad, nationwide sample of biology, chemistry, and physics professors”. I do accept that the test materials – male (n = 63) or a female (n = 64) – was sufficient, given that all other controls were as described.

    More disturbing that the prevalence of discrimination among the highly educated was the bias of women for male laboratory managers. Everyone knows that girls are smarter than boys.

    Perhaps this points to a flaw in the basic assumption that biology, chemistry, and physics professors are highly educated. Maybe we should ask, “Educated in what?” or “Educated to do what?”.

    It may be that we need only change a folkway and remove the NAME of the applicant from papers, and assign them numbers. In India this is done for academic achievement tests to limit the likelihood of ethnic discrimination.

    Like

    Michael Marotta

    September 25, 2012 at 2:37 am

  2. @Michael Marotta
    Seriously? In a blog post about gender bias you’re writing a sentence like “Everyone knows that girls are smarter than boys.” And no, I don’t see how you can talk yourself out of this with “irony”.

    Like

    Sebastian H.

    September 25, 2012 at 8:33 am

  3. […] So are the social policy implications. On the almost-free market blog, OrgTheory, is a link about gender bias in science research hiring. Even women who head labs preferentially hire and pay men in excess of women with equal […]

    Like

  4. […] gender bias in the academy (orgtheory.wordpress.com) […]

    Like


Comments are closed.