Survival analysis of faculty retention and promotion in the social sciences by gender

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 11, 2015, Pages

  Box Steffensmeier, Janet M ^a   Cunha, Raphael C ^a   Varbanov, Roumen A ^b   Hoh, Yee Shwen ^a   Knisley, Margaret L ^c   Holmes, Mary Alice ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CAREER; HUMAN; MATHEMATICS; MODEL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIOLOGY; SURVIVAL; UNIVERSITY; CAREER MOBILITY; FEMALE; MALE; MANPOWER; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNITED STATES;

CAREER MOBILITY; FACULTY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; SEX FACTORS; SOCIAL SCIENCES; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 84958073257     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143093     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Wickware P. Along the leaky pipeline. Nature. 1997; 390: 202-203.
2. Kaminski D, Geisler C. Survival Analysis of Faculty Retention in Science and Engineering by Gender. Science. 2012; 335: 864-866. doi: 10.1126/science.1214844 PMID: 22344445
3. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. Washington, D. C.: The National Academies Press; 2007.
4. Smith-Doerr L. Women's Work: Gender Equality Vs. Hierarchy in the Life Sciences. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers; 2004.
5. Philipsen MI, Bostic TB. Helping Faculty Find Work-Life Balance: The Path Toward Family-Friendly Institutions. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
6. National Science Foundation [Internet]. ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers; c2015 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm-summ.jsp?pims-id=5383.
7. University of Michigan [Internet]. ADVANCE Program; c2015 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://sitemaker.umich.edu/advance/home.
8. Washington State University[Internet]. Advance at WSU; c2015 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://advance.wsu.edu.
9. Texas A&M University [Internet]. STRIDE Program; c2015 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://advance.tamu.edu/index.php/stride-program/stride-program.html.
10. University of California, Davis [Internet]. ADVANCE Program; c2015 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://ucd-advance.ucdavis.edu/implicit-bias.
11. Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, Ohio State University [Internet]. State of the Science: Implicit Bias Review 2013; c2013-15 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/docs/SOTS-Implicit-Bias.pdf.
12. Visions in Methodology [Internet]. Visions in Methodology; c2015 [cited 2015 Oct 19]. Available: http://visionsinmethodology.org.
13. Valian V. Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1999.
14. Adamo SA. Attrition of Women in the Biological Sciences: Workload, Motherhood, and Other Explanations Revisited. BioScience. 2013; 63: 43-48.
15. Wolfinger NH, Mason MA, Goulden M. Problems in the Pipeline: Gender, Marriage, and Fertility in the Ivory Tower. J High Educ. 2008; 79: 388-405.
16. Morrison E, Rudd E, Nerad M. Onto, Up, Off the Academic Faculty Ladder: The Gendered Effects of Family on Career Transitions for a Cohort of Social Science Ph.D.s. Rev High Educ. 2011; 34: 525-553.
17. Gordon SE. Getting nowhere fast: The lack of gender equity in the physiology community. J Gen Physiol. 2014; 144: 1-3. doi: 10.1085/jgp.201411240 PMID: 24981226
18. Allison PD, Stewart JA. Productivity Differences Among Scientists: Evidence for Accumulative Advantage. Am Sociol Rev. 1974; 39: 596-606.
19. Clemente F. Early Career Determinants of Research Productivity. Am J Sociol. 1973; 79: 409-419.
20. Fox MF. Publication Productivity among Scientists: A Critical Review. Soc Stud Sci. 1983; 13: 285-305.
21. Hesli VL, Lee JM. Faculty Research Productivity: Why Do Some of Our Colleagues Publish More than Others? PS Polit Sci Polit. 2011; 44: 393-408.
22. Long JS, Allison PD, McGinnis R. Rank Advancement in Academic Careers: Sex Differences and the Effects of Productivity. Am Sociol Rev. 1993; 58: 703-722.
23. Sabatier M. Do female researchers face a glass ceiling in France? A hazard model of promotions. Appl Econ. 2010; 42: 2053-2062.
24. Duch J, Zeng XHT, Sales-Pardo M, Radicchi F, Otis S, Woodruff TK, et al. The Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact. PLoS ONE. 2012; 7: e51332. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051332 PMID: 23251502
25. Groeneveld S, Tijdens K, Kleef D van. Gender differences in academic careers. Equal Divers Incl Int J. 2012; 31: 646-662.
26. June A. W. Tenure Decisions at Southern Cal Strongly Favor White Men, Data in a Rejected Candidate's Complaint Suggest. Chronicle of Higher Education. 13 November 2012. Available: http://chronicle.com/article/Tenure-Decisions-at-Southern/135754/. Accessed 20 June 2015.
27. Junn J. Analysis of Data on Tenure at USC Dornsife. Memo to USC Dornsife Faculty Council. University of Southern California; 2012.
28. Jaschik S. Productivity or Sexism? Inside Higher Ed. 18 August 2014. Available: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/08/18/study-raises-questions-about-why-women-are-less-likely-menearn-tenure-research. Accessed 20 June 2015.
29. Weisshaar K. Measuring the Glass Ceiling Effect: An Assessment of Discrimination in Academia. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association. 2014.
30. Sanz-Menéndez L, Cruz-Castro L, Alva K. Time to Tenure in Spanish Universities: An Event History Analysis. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8: e77028. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077028 PMID: 24116199
31. Xie Y, Shauman KA. Sex Differences in Research Productivity: New Evidence about an Old Puzzle. Am Sociol Rev. 1998; 63: 847-870.
32. Collins LH. Competition and Contact: The Dynamics behind Resistance to Affirmative Action in Academe. In: Collins LH, Chrisler J, Quina K, editors. Career Strategies for Women in Academia: Arming Athena. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications, Inc; 1998. pp. 45-80.
33. Gmelch WH, Wilke PK Jr, NPL. Dimensions of stress among university faculty: Factor-analytic results from a national study. Res High Educ. 1986; 24: 266-286.
34. Suitor JJ, Mecom D, Feld IS. Gender, household labor, and scholarly productivity among university professors. Gend Issues. 2001; 19: 50-67.
35. Maliniak D, Powers R, Walter BF. The Gender Citation Gap in International Relations. Int Organ. 2013; 67: 889-922. doi: 10.1017/S0020818313000209
36. Hancock KJ, Baum MA, Breuning M. Women and Pre-Tenure Scholarly Productivity in International Studies: An Investigation into the Leaky Career Pipeline. Int Stud Perspect. 2013; 14: 507-527. doi: 10. 1111/insp.12002
37. Miller J, Chamberlin M. Women Are Teachers, Men Are Professors: A Study of Student Perceptions. Teach Sociol. 2000; 28: 283-298. doi: 10.2307/1318580
38. Sinclair L, Kunda Z. Motivated Stereotyping of Women: She's Fine if She Praised Me but Incompetent if She Criticized Me. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2000; 26: 1329-1342. doi: 10.1177/0146167200263002
39. Laube H, Massoni K, Sprague J, Ferber AL. The Impact of Gender on the Evaluation of Teaching: What We Know and What We Can Do. NWSA J. 2007; 19: 87-104.
40. Preston AE. Leaving Science: Occupational Exit from Scientific Careers. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2004.
41. Rich JT, Neely JG, Paniello RC, Voelker CCJ, Nussenbaum B, Wang EW. A practical guide to understanding Kaplan-Meier curves. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010; 143: 331-336. doi: 10.1016/j. otohns.2010.05.007 PMID: 20723767
42. Breslow N. A generalized Kruskal-Wallis test for comparing K samples subject to unequal patterns of censorship. Biometrika. 1970; 57: 579-594.
43. Gehan EA. A generalized Wilcoxon test for comparing arbitrarily singly-censored samples. Biometrika. 1965; 52: 203-223. PMID: 14341275
44. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. Springer; 2000.
45. Box-Steffensmeier JM, Jones BS. Event History Modeling: A Guide for Social Scientists. Cambridge University Press; 2004.
46. Hougaard P. Modelling Heterogeneity in Survival Data. J Appl Probab. 1991; 28: 695-701.
47. Hougaard P. Frailty models for survival data. Lifetime Data Anal. 1995; 1: 255-273. PMID: 9385105
48. Klein JP, Moeschberger ML. Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data. 2nd edition. New York: Springer; 2005.
49. Welch S., Long C. P. Where They Are Now. Chronicle of Higher Education. 10 February 2014. Available: http://chronicle.com/article/Where-They-Are-Now/144627/. Accessed 20 June 2015.