Literature DB >> 24616490

How stereotypes impair women's careers in science.

Ernesto Reuben1, Paola Sapienza, Luigi Zingales.   

Abstract

Women outnumber men in undergraduate enrollments, but they are much less likely than men to major in mathematics or science or to choose a profession in these fields. This outcome often is attributed to the effects of negative sex-based stereotypes. We studied the effect of such stereotypes in an experimental market, where subjects were hired to perform an arithmetic task that, on average, both genders perform equally well. We find that without any information other than a candidate's appearance (which makes sex clear), both male and female subjects are twice more likely to hire a man than a woman. The discrimination survives if performance on the arithmetic task is self-reported, because men tend to boast about their performance, whereas women generally underreport it. The discrimination is reduced, but not eliminated, by providing full information about previous performance on the task. By using the Implicit Association Test, we show that implicit stereotypes are responsible for the initial average bias in sex-related beliefs and for a bias in updating expectations when performance information is self-reported. That is, employers biased against women are less likely to take into account the fact that men, on average, boast more than women about their future performance, leading to suboptimal hiring choices that remain biased in favor of men.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diversity; gender stereotypes; science education; science workforce

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24616490      PMCID: PMC3970474          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1314788111

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  8 in total

1.  Diversity. Gender similarities characterize math performance.

Authors:  Janet S Hyde; Sara M Lindberg; Marcia C Linn; Amy B Ellis; Caroline C Williams
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-07-25       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity.

Authors:  Anthony G Greenwald; T Andrew Poehlman; Eric Luis Uhlmann; Mahzarin R Banaji
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2009-07

3.  Diversity. Culture, gender, and math.

Authors:  Luigi Guiso; Ferdinando Monte; Paola Sapienza; Luigi Zingales
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-05-30       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test.

Authors:  A G Greenwald; D E McGhee; J L Schwartz
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1998-06

5.  Gender differences in mathematics performance: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  J S Hyde; E Fennema; S J Lamon
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 17.737

6.  Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students.

Authors:  Corinne A Moss-Racusin; John F Dovidio; Victoria L Brescoll; Mark J Graham; Jo Handelsman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Gender, culture, and mathematics performance.

Authors:  Janet S Hyde; Janet E Mertz
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes: a prospective study of female college students.

Authors:  Amy K Kiefer; Denise Sekaquaptewa
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-01
  8 in total
  57 in total

1.  Shifting STEM Stereotypes? Considering the Role of Peer and Teacher Gender.

Authors:  Catherine Riegle-Crumb; Chelsea Moore; Jenny Buontempo
Journal:  J Res Adolesc       Date:  2016-10-12

2.  National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track.

Authors:  Wendy M Williams; Stephen J Ceci
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Entrofy your cohort: A transparent method for diverse cohort selection.

Authors:  Daniela Huppenkothen; Brian McFee; Laura Norén
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Balancing family life with a science career.

Authors:  Akiko Iwasaki
Journal:  Nat Immunol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 25.606

Review 5.  Gender in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Issues, Causes, Solutions.

Authors:  Tessa E S Charlesworth; Mahzarin R Banaji
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Gender disparities among independent fellows in biomedical research.

Authors:  Jason M Sheltzer
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 54.908

7.  The base rate principle and the fairness principle in social judgment.

Authors:  Jack Cao; Mahzarin R Banaji
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Compared to men, women view professional advancement as equally attainable, but less desirable.

Authors:  Francesca Gino; Caroline Ashley Wilmuth; Alison Wood Brooks
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder.

Authors:  Ian M Handley; Elizabeth R Brown; Corinne A Moss-Racusin; Jessi L Smith
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Addressing Gender Equity in Senior Leadership Roles in Translational Science.

Authors:  Dianna J Magliano; Vaughan G Macefield; Tracey M Ellis; Anna C Calkin
Journal:  ACS Pharmacol Transl Sci       Date:  2020-07-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.