Why Are Some Academic Fields Tipping Toward Female? The Sex Composition of U.S. Fields of Doctoral Degree Receipt, 1971–2002

Abstract

Using data on the number of men and women who received doctorates in all academic field from 1971 to 2002, the authors examine changes in the sex composition of fields. During thi period, the proportion of women who received doctorates increased dramatically from 14 per cent to 46 percent. Regression models with fixed effects indicate no evidence that fields with declining relative salaries deter the entry of men, as would be predicted by the queuing the ory of Reskin and Roos. Consistent with the devaluation perspective and Schelling's tipping model, above a certain percentage of women, men are deterred from entering fields by th fields' further feminization. However, the rank order of fields in the percentage of women changed only slightly over time, implying that, to a large extent, men and women continued to choose fields as before, even when many more women received doctorates. The finding

Are men and women-economists evenly distributed across research fields? Some new empirical evidence

“…Finally, it is worth noticing that this finding contrasts with the results obtained in the above-mentioned paper by England et al (2003). Using a similar methodology to ours, these authors find that deterrence is larger for men than for women among the US population receiving doctorates in a wide range of academic fields between 1971 and 1998.…”

“…The results, not reported for the sake of brevity, were qualitatively similar. 15 One of the referees pointed out to us a related paper by England et al (2003), that we were not aware of, where a similar negative-binomial model is used to address the issue of changes in sex composition regarding doctorates awarded in the US in 18 major academic disciplines-ranging from natural sciences to and a variance given by μ M f c (1 + θμ M f c ) where θ is the over-dispersion parameter (θ = 0 corresponds to the Poisson distribution). In turn, the expected value μ M f c is assumed to be a function of explanatory variables (x fc ), such that ln μ M f c = δ f +β x f c where δ f is an intercept controlling for all stable characteristics in each of the fields.…”

Gendered study choice: a literature review. A review of theory and research into the unequal representation of male and female students in mathematics, science, and technology

“…Most sociologists, however, have now abandoned this idea, as recent studies have shown that increases in gender equality have not led to more equal representations of women in male-dominated fields as MST and related professions (Charles & Bradley, 2009;Scantlebury & Baker, 2007;Schreiner & Sjøberg, 2005). Even in countries with high overall female enrolment rates in higher education, including most European Union countries and the United States, women remain underrepresented in MST (Charles & Bradley, 2002;England et al, 2007;England & Li, 2006;J. A. Jacobs, 2003;Xie & Shauman, 2003).…”

Degrees of Difference: Gender Segregation of U.S. Doctorates by Field and Program Prestige

“…To date, the literature on educational segregation has focused on the distribution of men and women across fields of study, how this distribution varies over time and space, and its consequences for gender inequality in career outcomes Bradley 2002, 2009;England and Li 2006;England et al 2007;Barone 2011;Bobbitt-Zeher 2007;DiPrete 2013, 2016;NSF 2015b;Ransom 1990). We extend this line of research by offering a multidimensional analysis of segregation in doctoral education across fields of study and across PhD-granting programs that differ in their prestige.…”

“…Field segregation, by contrast, is horizontal: the boundaries between fields define qualitatively different positions, but fields "represent distinctions more of kind than of grade" (Charles and Bradley 2002:574). To be sure, some scholars estimate vertical segregation by identifying an external continuous variable that is assumed to capture distinctions of grade among fields (e.g., the average wages of new graduates), applying this variable to fields, and calculating the share of the overall association between gender and fields of study that is captured by this variable (England et al 2007;Barone 2011). Prestige segregation can be understood as a complementary (and more direct) measure of vertical segregation in higher education.…”