Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 109, Issue 41, 2012, Pages 16474-16479

  Moss Racusin, Corinne A ^a   Dovidio, John F ^a   Brescoll, Victoria L ^a   Graham, Mark J ^a,b   Handelsman, Jo ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Diversity; Lifestyle choices; Science education; Science workforce

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; FACULTY PRACTICE; FEMALE; FEMALE APPLICANT; FEMALE STUDENT; GENDER BIAS; HUMAN; JOB FINDING; LABORATORY MANAGER; MALE; MALE APPLICANT; MALE STUDENT; MANAGER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SALARY; SCIENCE FACULTY; UNIVERSITY STUDENT;

ADULT; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FACULTY; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABORATORY PERSONNEL; MALE; PERSONNEL SELECTION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS; SCIENCE; SEX FACTORS; SEXISM; STUDENTS;

EID: 84867366638     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ pcast-engage-to-excel-final-feb.pdf. (Accessed February 13, 2012).
2. Handelsman J, et al. (2005) Careers in science. More women in science. Science 309:1190-1191.
3. United States National Academy of Sciences (2007) Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (National Academies, Washington, DC).
4. National Science Foundation (2009) Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering (National Science Foundation, Arlington).
5. Bell N (2010) Graduate Enrollment and Degrees: 1999 to 2009 (Council of Graduate Schools, Washington, DC).
6. Halpern DF, et al. (2007) The science of gender differences in science and mathematics. Psychol Sci 8(1):1-51.
7. Hyde JS, Linn MC (2006) Diversity. Gender similarities in mathematics and science. Science 314:599-600. (Pubitemid 44646369)
8. Spelke ES (2005) Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science?: A critical review. Am Psychol 60:950-958.
9. Ceci SJ, Williams WM (2010) Gender differences in math-intensive fields. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 19:275-279.
10. Ceci SJ, Williams WM (2011) Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:3157-3162.
11. Ceci SJ, et al. (2011) Do subtle cues about belongingness constrain women's career choices? Psychol Inq 22:255-258.
12. Berezow AB (2011) Gender discrimination in science is a myth. Available at http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/256816/gender-discrimination-science- myth-alex-b-berezow?pg=2. (Accessed June 6, 2012).
13. Dickey Zakaib G (2011) Science gender gap probed. Nature 470:153.
14. Devine PG (1989) Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. J Pers Soc Psychol 56(1):5-18.
15. Eagly AH, Mladinic A (1994) Are people prejudiced against women? Some answers from research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and judgments of competence. Eur Rev Soc Psychol 5(1):1-35.
16. Spence JT, Hahn ED (1997) The attitudes toward women scale and attitude change in college students. Psychol Women Q 21(1):17-34.
17. Dovidio JF, Gaertner SL (2004) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed Zanna MP (Elsevier, New York), pp 1-51.
18. Nosek BA, Banaji M, Greenwald AG (2002) Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dyn 6(1):101-115. (Pubitemid 34232588)
19. Goldin C, Rouse C (2000) Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of "blind" auditions on female musicians. Am Econ Rev 90:715-741.
20. Foschi M (2000) Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annu Rev Sociol 26(1):21-42.
21. Foschi M(1996) Double standards in the evaluation of men and women. Soc Psychol Q 59:237-254.
22. Goldberg P (1968) Are women prejudiced against women? Transaction 5(5):28-30.
23. Heilman ME, Wallen AS, Fuchs D, Tamkins MM (2004) Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. J Appl Psychol 89:416-427. (Pubitemid 38782934)
24. Monin B, Miller DT (2001) Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. J Pers Soc Psychol 81:33-43. (Pubitemid 33594637)
25. Uhlmann EL, Cohen GL (2007) "I think it, therefore it's true": Effects of self-perceived objectivity on hiring discrimination. Organ Behav Hum Dec 104:207-223.
26. Nosek BA, Banaji MR, Greenwald AG (2002) Math = male, me = female, therefore math not = me. J Pers Soc Psychol 83:44-59.
27. Dasgupta N (2011) Ingroup experts and peers as social vaccines who inoculate the self-concept: The stereotype inoculation model. Psychol Inq 22:231-246.
28. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1999) A study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. Available at http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/ women.html#The%20Study (Accessed February 13, 2012).
29. Steele J, James JB, Barnett RC (2002) Learning in a man's world: Examining the perceptions of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas. Psychol Women Q 26(1):46-50.
30. Lent RW, et al. (2001) The role of contextual supports and barriers in the choice of math/science educational options: A test of social cognitive hypotheses. J Couns Psychol 48:474-483. (Pubitemid 32982179)
31. Seymour E, Hewitt NM (1996) Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences (Westview, Boulder).
32. Gasiewski JA, et al. (2012) From gatekeeping to engagement: A multicontextual, mixed method study of student academic engagement in introductory STEM courses. Res Higher Educ 53:229-261.
33. Byars-Winston A, Gutierrez B, Topp S, Carnes M (2011) Integrating theory and practice to increase scientific workforce diversity: A framework for career development in graduate research training. CBE Life Sci Educ 10:357-367.
34. Campbell DT, Fiske DW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multi-trait- multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull 56:81-105.
35. Robins RW, Hendin HM, Trzesniewski KH (2001) Measuring global self esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 27(2):151-161.
36. Moss-Racusin CA, Rudman LA (2010) Disruptions in women's self-promotion: The backlash avoidance model. Psychol Women Q 34:186-202.
37. Rudman LA, Moss-Racusin CA, Glick P, Phelan JE (2012) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, eds Devine P, Plant A (Elsevier, New York), pp 167-227.
38. Swim JK, Aikin KJ, Hall WS, Hunter BA (1995) Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. J Pers Soc Psychol 68:199-214.
39. Martell RF, Lane DM, Emrich C (1996) Male-female differences: A computer simulation. Am Psychol 51(2):157-158.
40. Steinpreis RE, Anders KA, Ritzke D (1999) The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles 41:509-528.
41. Bandura A (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol 37:122-147.
42. Scandura TA, Lankau MJ (1997) Relationships of gender, family responsibility and flexible work hours to organizational commitment and job satisfaction. J Organ Behav 18:377-391. (Pubitemid 127341671)
43. Rudman LA, Ashmore RD, Gary ML (2001) "Unlearning" automatic biases: The malleability of implicit prejudice and stereotypes. J Pers Soc Psychol 81:856-868. (Pubitemid 33597823)
44. O'Neill OA, O'Reilly CA (2011) Reducing the backlash effect: Self-monitoring and women's promotions. J Occup Organ Psychol 84:825-832.
45. Uhlmann EL, Cohen GL (2005) Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychol Sci 16:474-480. (Pubitemid 40855735)
46. Phelan JE, Moss-Racusin CA, Rudman LA (2008) Competent yet out in the cold: Shifting criteria for hiring reflects backlash toward agentic women. Psychol Women Q 32:406- 413.
47. Holbrook AL, Krosnick JA, Pfent A (2007) Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology, eds Lepkowski JM, et al. (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken), pp 499-528.
48. Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U (2011) False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychol Sci 22:1359-1366.
49. Bargh JA, Chartrand TL (2000) Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology, eds Reis HT, Judd CM (Cambridge Univ Press, New York), pp 253-285.
50. Brescoll VL, Uhlmann EL (2008) Can angry women get ahead? Status conferral, gender, and workplace emotion expression. Psychol Sci 19:268-275.
51. Cohen J (1998) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Erlbaum, Hillsdale), 2nd Ed.