Literature DB >> 25374039

The effect of an intervention to break the gender bias habit for faculty at one institution: a cluster randomized, controlled trial.

Molly Carnes1, Patricia G Devine, Linda Baier Manwell, Angela Byars-Winston, Eve Fine, Cecilia E Ford, Patrick Forscher, Carol Isaac, Anna Kaatz, Wairimu Magua, Mari Palta, Jennifer Sheridan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Despite sincere commitment to egalitarian, meritocratic principles, subtle gender bias persists, constraining women's opportunities for academic advancement. The authors implemented a pair-matched, single-blind, cluster randomized, controlled study of a gender-bias-habit-changing intervention at a large public university.
METHOD: Participants were faculty in 92 departments or divisions at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Between September 2010 and March 2012, experimental departments were offered a gender-bias-habit-changing intervention as a 2.5-hour workshop. Surveys measured gender bias awareness; motivation, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations to reduce bias; and gender equity action. A timed word categorization task measured implicit gender/leadership bias. Faculty completed a work-life survey before and after all experimental departments received the intervention. Control departments were offered workshops after data were collected.
RESULTS: Linear mixed-effects models showed significantly greater changes post intervention for faculty in experimental versus control departments on several outcome measures, including self-efficacy to engage in gender-equity-promoting behaviors (P = .013). When ≥ 25% of a department's faculty attended the workshop (26 of 46 departments), significant increases in self-reported action to promote gender equity occurred at three months (P = .007). Post intervention, faculty in experimental departments expressed greater perceptions of fit (P = .024), valuing of their research (P = .019), and comfort in raising personal and professional conflicts (P = .025).
CONCLUSIONS: An intervention that facilitates intentional behavioral change can help faculty break the gender bias habit and change department climate in ways that should support the career advancement of women in academic medicine, science, and engineering.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25374039      PMCID: PMC4310758          DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000552

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  38 in total

1.  Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.

Authors:  Anthony G Greenwald; Brian A Nosek; Mahzarin R Banaji
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2003-08

2.  CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.

Authors:  Marion K Campbell; Diana R Elbourne; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-03-20

3.  Diversity in academic medicine: the stages of change model.

Authors:  Molly Carnes; Jo Handelsman; Jennifer Sheridan
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2005 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 4.  Interventions that affect gender bias in hiring: a systematic review.

Authors:  Carol Isaac; Barbara Lee; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  Does stereotype threat affect women in academic medicine?

Authors:  Diana Jill Burgess; Anne Joseph; Michelle van Ryn; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  Constructed criteria: redefining merit to justify discrimination.

Authors:  Ericluis Uhlmann; Geoffrey L Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-06

7.  Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what.

Authors:  Kenneth F Schulz; David A Grimes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-02-23       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 8.  Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.

Authors:  Alice H Eagly; Steven J Karau
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 9.  Impact of CONSORT extension for cluster randomised trials on quality of reporting and study methodology: review of random sample of 300 trials, 2000-8.

Authors:  N M Ivers; M Taljaard; S Dixon; C Bennett; A McRae; J Taleban; Z Skea; J C Brehaut; R F Boruch; M P Eccles; J M Grimshaw; C Weijer; M Zwarenstein; A Donner
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-09-26

Review 10.  Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review.

Authors:  Noah M Ivers; Ilana J Halperin; Jan Barnsley; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Baiju R Shah; Karen Tu; Ross Upshur; Merrick Zwarenstein
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  104 in total

1.  National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity.

Authors:  Hannah A Valantine; Francis S Collins
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  American Pediatric Society 2015 Presidential Address: leaky pipes, glass ceilings, and changing landscapes-time to renovate the pediatric house.

Authors:  Donna M Ferriero
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 3.756

3.  Perceptions and experiences of a gender gap at a Canadian research institute and potential strategies to mitigate this gap: a sequential mixed-methods study.

Authors:  Alekhya Mascarenhas; Julia E Moore; Andrea C Tricco; Jemila Hamid; Caitlin Daly; Julie Bain; Sabrina Jassemi; Tara Kiran; Nancy Baxter; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2017-02-23

4.  Race/ethnicity and sex in U.S. occupations, 1970-2010: Implications for research, practice, and policy.

Authors:  Angela Byars-Winston; Nadya Fouad; Yao Wen
Journal:  J Vocat Behav       Date:  2015-04-01

5.  Women Are Less Likely Than Men to Be Full Professors in Cardiology: Why Does This Happen and How Can We Fix It?

Authors:  Molly Carnes; C Noel Bairey Merz
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 Application Critiques, Impact, and Criteria Scores: Does the Sex of the Principal Investigator Make a Difference?

Authors:  Anna Kaatz; You-Geon Lee; Aaron Potvien; Wairimu Magua; Amarette Filut; Anupama Bhattacharya; Renee Leatherberry; Xiaojin Zhu; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 6.893

7.  The Science and Value of Diversity: Closing the Gaps in Our Understanding of Inclusion and Diversity.

Authors:  Talia H Swartz; Ann-Gel S Palermo; Sandra K Masur; Judith A Aberg
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2019-08-20       Impact factor: 5.226

Review 8.  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

Review 9.  Gender Bias in Resident Assessment in Graduate Medical Education: Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Robin Klein; Katherine A Julian; Erin D Snyder; Jennifer Koch; Nneka N Ufere; Anna Volerman; Ann E Vandenberg; Sarah Schaeffer; Kerri Palamara
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  The authors respond to "Tread carefully with #MeToo in the medical profession".

Authors:  Jayna M Holroyd-Leduc; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 8.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.