Abstract:We synthesized the vast, contradictory scholarly literature on gender bias in academic science from 2000 to 2020. In the most prestigious journals and media outlets, which influence many people’s opinions about sexism, bias is frequently portrayed as an omnipresent factor limiting women’s progress in the tenure-track academy. Claims and counterclaims regarding the presence or absence of sexism span a range of evaluation contexts. Our approach relied on a combination of meta-analysis and analytic dissection. We evaluated the empirical evidence for gender bias in six key contexts in the tenure-track academy: (a) tenure-track hiring, (b) grant funding, (c) teaching ratings, (d) journal acceptances, (e) salaries, and (f) recommendation letters. We also explored the gender gap in a seventh area, journal productivity, because it can moderate bias in other contexts. We focused on these specific domains, in which sexism has most often been alleged to be pervasive, because they represent important types of evaluation, and the extensive research corpus within these domains provides sufficient quantitative data for comprehensive analysis. Contrary to the omnipresent claims of sexism in these domains appearing in top journals and the media, our findings show that tenure-track women are at parity with tenure-track men in three domains (grant funding, journal acceptances, and recommendation letters) and are advantaged over men in a fourth domain (hiring). For teaching ratings and salaries, we found evidence of bias against women; although gender gaps in salary were much smaller than often claimed, they were nevertheless concerning. Even in the four domains in which we failed to find evidence of sexism disadvantaging women, we nevertheless acknowledge that broad societal structural factors may still impede women’s advancement in academic science. Given the substantial resources directed toward reducing gender bias in academic science, it is imperative to develop a clear understanding of when and where such efforts are justified and of how resources can best be directed to mitigate sexism when and where it exists.

Gender Bias in English: In Search of Fair Language

Gender Bias and Sexism in Language

Attitudes about gender bias in language: A reevaluation

Reducing a Male Bias in Language? Establishing the Efficiency of Three Different Gender-Fair Language Strategies

Ladies First or Ladies Last: Do Masculine Generics Evoke a Reduced and Later Retrieval of Female Exemplars?

“Master” of none: Institutional language change linked to reduced gender bias.

Neutral is not fair enough: testing the efficiency of different language gender-fair strategies

Gender representation in linguistic example sentences

A Survey on Gender Bias in Natural Language Processing

Does Gender Matter in the News? Detecting and Examining Gender Bias in News Articles

Gender Bias in Word Embeddings: A Comprehensive Analysis of Frequency, Syntax, and Semantics

Gender differences in research areas and topics: An analysis of publications in 285 fields

Let’s Face It: We Are Biased, and It Should Not Be That Way

Theories of "Gender" in NLP Bias Research

''Fifty Shades of Bias'': Normative Ratings of Gender Bias in GPT Generated English Text

Gender Bias in Large Language Models across Multiple Languages

Gender bias in reference letters for residency and academic medicine: a systematic review

Exploring Gender Bias in Six Key Domains of Academic Science: An Adversarial Collaboration

Gender-Typical Style In Written Language

A Computational Evaluation of Gender Asymmetry in Semantic Change

Gender Bias in Artificial Intelligence-Written Letters of Reference