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 Academic Recruitment? Evidence from a Survey Experiment in the Nordic Region

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

Gender Discrimination in Hiring: Evidence from a Cross-National Harmonized Field Experiment

Gender bias in academic recruitment

Assessing Gender Bias in Particle Physics and Social Science Recommendations for Academic Jobs

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

Gender bias in Nobel prizes

Gender composition predicts gender bias: A meta-reanalysis of hiring discrimination audit experiments

Gender differences in research grant allocation -- a mixed picture

Gender bias in teaching evaluations: the causal role of department gender composition

Gender discrimination and the backlash effect in recruitment and dismissal processes: experimental evidence from Slovakia

Examining potential gender bias in automated-job alerts in the Spanish market

Gender and cultural bias in student evaluations: Why representation matters

Barriers to attracting the best researchers: perceptions of academics in economics and physics in three European countries

Interventions That Affect Gender Bias in Hiring: A Systematic Review

Gender Disparities in Nobel Prize Winning Labs. A Look into Glass Ceilings, Maternal Walls and Bottlenecks

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

The re-production process of gender bias: a case of ICT professors through recruitment in a gender-neutral country

Gender Bias in English: In Search of Fair Language

A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making.

Ethnic discrimination in Scandinavia: evidence from a field experiment in women's amateur soccer