Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines

Leslie, Sarah‐Jane; Cimpian, Andrei; Meyer, Meredith; Freeland, Edward P.

doi:10.1126/science.1261375

Cited by 1,059 publications

(1,040 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

953

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Engineering has historically been seen as a "masculine" profession, because it is numerically male-dominated, and because the culture and ethos of the industry are considered masculine [21,22]. Further, in male-dominated disciplines such as engineering, academic success has been understood to depend on raw brilliance, a quality less frequently attributed to women [23].…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender in Engineering Departments: Are There Gender Differences in Interruptions of Academic Job Talks?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We use a case study of job talks in five engineering departments to analyze the under-studied area of gendered barriers to finalists for faculty positions. We focus on one segment of the interview day of short-listed candidates invited to campus: the "job talk", when candidates present their original research to the academic department. We analyze video recordings of 119 job talks across five engineering departments at two Research 1 universities. Specifically, we analyze whether there are differences by gender or by years of post-Ph.D. experience in the number of interruptions, follow-up questions, and total questions that job candidates receive. We find that, compared to men, women receive more follow-up questions and more total questions. Moreover, a higher proportion of women's talk time is taken up by the audience asking questions. Further, the number of questions is correlated with the job candidate's statements and actions that reveal he or she is rushing to present their slides and complete the talk. We argue that women candidates face more interruptions and often have less time to bring their talk to a compelling conclusion, which is connected to the phenomenon of "stricter standards" of competence demanded by evaluators of short-listed women applying for a masculine-typed job. We conclude with policy recommendations.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Framework and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender in Engineering Departments: Are There Gender Differences in Interruptions of Academic Job Talks?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many STEM fields, especially the more male-dominated ones like physics and computer science, share a culture in which high levels of raw talent and brilliance are viewed as essential to success. Recent studies suggest that differences across fields in the strength of this "brilliance narrative"-both among academics and within the broader culture-map directly onto the distribution of men and women across fields Leslie et al 2015).…”

Section: Stereotype Content and Inequality In Stemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Segregation, Stereotypes, and STEM

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) occupations are strongholds of gender segregation in the contemporary United States. While many Americans regard this segregation as natural and inevitable, closer examination reveals a great deal of variability in the gendering of STEM fields across time, space, and demographic groups. This article assesses how different theoretical accounts accord with the available evidence on the gender composition of scientific and technical fields. We find most support for accounts that allow for a dynamic interplay between individual-level traits and the broader sociocultural environments in which they develop. The existing evidence suggests, in particular, that Western cultural stereotypes about the nature of STEM work and STEM workers and about the intrinsic qualities of men and women can be powerful drivers of individual aptitudes, aspirations, and affinities. We offer an illustrative catalog of stereotypes that support women's STEM-avoidance and men's STEM-affinity, and we conclude with some thoughts on policy implications.Keywords: gender; STEM; segregation; stereotypes; culture; work; occupations; science; inequality For more than three decades, American educators, policy makers, activists, and business leaders have engaged in research and policy initiatives to increase the presence of women and other underrepresented groups in scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) occupations and fields of study. These efforts have been motivated by interests in broadening opportunities in lucrative, high-status occupations and in ameliorating acute STEM labor shortages that are believed to threaten national prosperity, private profits and the public welfare.Despite wide-ranging research and policy efforts, STEM occupations remain strongholds of gender segregation in the contemporary United States. Women made up nearly half of the US labor market in 2015, but only 28% of all scientific and technical workers. Within STEM, gender segregation is also very strong, with women comprising 48% of life scientists and 60% of social scientists, but only 28% of physical scientists and 15% of engineers (NSF 2018, Appendices 3-12). 1 While some fields have integrated over time, others have become more segregated. Women's share of US bachelor's degrees in computer science, for instance, declined from 28% to 18% between (NSF 2018.While many Americans understand men's dominance of scientific and technical work as natural and universal, the gender typing of STEM fields varies a great deal across space, time, and socio-demographic groups. Recent comparative studies have shown that scientific degree recipients are disproportionately female in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Romania, and Georgia, for example, and that the gender gap in children's STEM aspirations is larger in more affluent societies (Charles 2011a(Charles , 2017 1 Even within engineering women and men tend to do different work: about 10% of mechanical and electrical engineers are women, compared to 20...

show abstract

“…Overall, science also is more implicitly associated with men than with women, because gender stereotypes characterize women as lacking the masculine traits associated with ability and success in science (18,19). For instance, a recent study linked the level of women's underrepresentation across academic disciplines to the magnitude of the stereotype-based assumption that innate talent is associated with male traits and considered necessary for academic career success (20). Moreover, women still earn on average 18% less than their male colleagues for the same work with similar responsibilities (3).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands

Lee

Ellemers

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

216

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the application and review materials of three calls (n = 2,823) of a prestigious grant for personal research funding in a national full population of early career scientists awarded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Results showed evidence of gender bias in application evaluations and success rates, as well as in language use in instructions and evaluation sheets. Male applicants received significantly more competitive "quality of researcher" evaluations (but not "quality of proposal" evaluations) and had significantly higher application success rates than female applicants. Gender disparities were most prevalent in scientific disciplines with the highest number of applications and with equal gender distribution among the applicants (i.e., life sciences and social sciences). Moreover, content analyses of the instructional and evaluation materials revealed the use of gendered language favoring male applicants. Overall, our data reveal a 4% "loss" of women during the grant review procedure, and illustrate the perpetuation of the funding gap, which contributes to the underrepresentation of women in academia.gender bias | research funding | success rates | academia | STEM W omen are still underrepresented in academia today. Despite various attempts to promote gender equality (e.g., affirmative action initiatives, quotas), female scientists are less likely to get offered tenure, are judged to be less competent, receive less payment and research facilities, and are less likely to be awarded research grants compared with male scientists (1-3). Over time, this type of bias accumulates and contributes to the attrition of women from academia (4); the academic pipeline leaks. Here we report evidence of gender bias in personal research funding for early career scientists.The importance of equal gender representation is widely acknowledged, for several reasons. First, it can resolve historic inequalities and provide equal opportunities (the "moral case for diversity") (5, 6). Second, research has demonstrated that gender diversity in organizations can boost innovation and creativity, expand target groups, and increase productivity (the "business case for diversity") (7, 8), either directly or indirectly through decision making processes or reputation, and provided that the organizational culture is open to change (9-12). This is true for academia as well. Gender-diverse research teams facilitate innovation and excellence in research and policy, address different research questions and methods, and facilitate wider application of research findings (13), thereby contributing to scientific progress.Relevant statistics, however, show a persistent leadership gap, salary gap, and funding gap for women in academia (3). To illustrate, The Netherlands-generally considered a high-equity nationhad only 16% female full professors in 2012 (14). Leadership is stereotyped as masculine and consequently associated more strongly with stereotypical male traits rather than female traits. Although women a...

show abstract

Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines

Cited by 1,059 publications

References 21 publications

Gender in Engineering Departments: Are There Gender Differences in Interruptions of Academic Job Talks?

Gender in Engineering Departments: Are There Gender Differences in Interruptions of Academic Job Talks?

Segregation, Stereotypes, and STEM

Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About