Gender bias might be working at level of whole disciplines

Holly Else

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02502-6

IF: 64.8

2024-08-20

Nature

Abstract:Study adds to growing body of evidence that such biases can affect all researchers in a field. Study adds to growing body of evidence that such biases can affect all researchers in a field.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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

Shulamit Kahn,Stephen J. Ceci,Wendy M. Williams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15291006231163179

2023-04-26

Psychological Science in the Public Interest

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.

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

Mike Thelwall,Carol Bailey,Catherine Tobin,Noel-Ann Bradshaw

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1809.01255

2018-09-04

Digital Libraries

Abstract:Although the gender gap in academia has narrowed, females are underrepresented within some fields in the USA. Prior research suggests that the imbalances between science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields may be partly due to greater male interest in things and greater female interest in people, or to off-putting masculine cultures in some disciplines. To seek more detailed insights across all subjects, this article compares practising US male and female researchers between and within 285 narrow Scopus fields inside 26 broad fields from their first-authored articles published in 2017. The comparison is based on publishing fields and the words used in article titles, abstracts, and keywords. The results cannot be fully explained by the people/thing dimensions. Exceptions include greater female interest in veterinary science and cell biology and greater male interest in abstraction, patients, and power/control fields, such as politics and law. These may be due to other factors, such as the ability of a career to provide status or social impact or the availability of alternative careers. As a possible side effect of the partial people/thing relationship, females are more likely to use exploratory and qualitative methods and males are more likely to use quantitative methods. The results suggest that the necessary steps of eliminating explicit and implicit gender bias in academia are insufficient and might be complemented by measures to make fields more attractive to minority genders.
Bias against research on gender bias

Aleksandra Cislak,Magdalena Formanowicz,Tamar Saguy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2667-0

IF: 3.801

2018-02-17

Scientometrics

Abstract:The bias against women in academia is a documented phenomenon that has had detrimental consequences, not only for women, but also for the quality of science. First, gender bias in academia affects female scientists, resulting in their underrepresentation in academic institutions, particularly in higher ranks. The second type of gender bias in science relates to some findings applying only to male participants, which produces biased knowledge. Here, we identify a third potentially powerful source of gender bias in academia: the bias against research on gender bias. In a bibliometric investigation covering a broad range of social sciences, we analyzed published articles on gender bias and race bias and established that articles on gender bias are funded less often and published in journals with a lower Impact Factor than articles on comparable instances of social discrimination. This result suggests the possibility of an underappreciation of the phenomenon of gender bias and related research within the academic community. Addressing this meta-bias is crucial for the further examination of gender inequality, which severely affects many women across the world.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder

Ian M. Handley,Elizabeth R. Brown,Corinne A. Moss-Racusin,Jessi L. Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1510649112

IF: 11.1

2015-10-12

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract:Significance Ever-growing empirical evidence documents a gender bias against women and their research—and favoring men—in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Our research examined how receptive the scientific and public communities are to experimental evidence demonstrating this gender bias, which may contribute to women’s underrepresentation within STEM. Results from our three experiments, using general-public and university faculty samples, demonstrated that men evaluate the quality of research unveiling this bias as less meritorious than do women. These findings may inform and fuel self-correction efforts within STEM to reduce gender bias, bolster objectivity and diversity in STEM workforces, and enhance discovery, education, and achievement.
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

Corinne A. Moss-Racusin,John F. Dovidio,Victoria L. Brescoll,Mark J. Graham,Jo Handelsman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109

IF: 11.1

2012-09-17

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract:Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study ( n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.
Gender composition predicts gender bias: A meta-reanalysis of hiring discrimination audit experiments

Diana Roxana Galos,Alexander Coppock

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ade7979

IF: 13.6

2023-05-07

Science Advances

Abstract:Since 1983, more than 70 employment audit experiments, carried out in more than 26 countries across five continents, have randomized the gender of fictitious applicants to measure the extent of hiring discrimination on the basis of gender. The results are mixed: Some studies find discrimination against men, and others find discrimination against women. We reconcile these heterogeneous findings through a "meta-reanalysis" of the average effects of being described as a woman (versus a man), conditional on occupation. We find a strongly positive gender gradient. In (relatively better paying) occupations dominated by men, the effect of being a woman is negative, while in the (relatively lower paying) occupations dominated by women, the effect is positive. In this way, heterogeneous employment discrimination on the basis of gender preserves status quo gender distributions and earnings gaps. These patterns hold among both minority and majority status applicants.

multidisciplinary sciences
Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions

Anaïs Llorens,Athina Tzovara,Ludovic Bellier,Ilina Bhaya-Grossman,Aurélie Bidet-Caulet,William K Chang,Zachariah R Cross,Rosa Dominguez-Faus,Adeen Flinker,Yvonne Fonken,Mark A Gorenstein,Chris Holdgraf,Colin W Hoy,Maria V Ivanova,Richard T Jimenez,Soyeon Jun,Julia W Y Kam,Celeste Kidd,Enitan Marcelle,Deborah Marciano,Stephanie Martin,Nicholas E Myers,Karita Ojala,Anat Perry,Pedro Pinheiro-Chagas,Stephanie K Riès,Ignacio Saez,Ivan Skelin,Katarina Slama,Brooke Staveland,Danielle S Bassett,Elizabeth A Buffalo,Adrienne L Fairhall,Nancy J Kopell,Laura J Kray,Jack J Lin,Anna C Nobre,Dylan Riley,Anne-Kristin Solbakk,Joni D Wallis,Xiao-Jing Wang,Shlomit Yuval-Greenberg,Sabine Kastner,Robert T Knight,Nina F Dronkers,William K. Chang,Zachariah R. Cross,Mark A. Gorenstein,Colin W. Hoy,Maria V. Ivanova,Richard T. Jimenez,Julia W.Y. Kam,Nicholas E. Myers,Stephanie K. Riès,Danielle S. Bassett,Elizabeth A. Buffalo,Adrienne L. Fairhall,Nancy J. Kopell,Laura J. Kray,Jack J. Lin,Anna C. Nobre,Joni D. Wallis,Robert T. Knight,Nina F. Dronkers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2021.06.002

IF: 16.2

2021-07-01

Neuron

Abstract:Despite increased awareness of the lack of gender equity in academia and a growing number of initiatives to address issues of diversity, change is slow, and inequalities remain. A major source of inequity is gender bias, which has a substantial negative impact on the careers, work-life balance, and mental health of underrepresented groups in science. Here, we argue that gender bias is not a single problem but manifests as a collection of distinct issues that impact researchers' lives. We disentangle these facets and propose concrete solutions that can be adopted by individuals, academic institutions, and society.

neurosciences
Gender differences in research grant allocation -- a mixed picture

Peter van den Besselaar,Charlie Mom

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.13641

2022-05-27

Abstract:Gender bias in grant allocation is a deviation from the principle that scientific merit should guide grant decisions. However, most studies on gender bias in grant allocation focus on gender differences in success rates, without including variables that measure merit. This study has two main contributions. Firstly, it includes several merit variables in the analysis. Secondly, it includes an analysis at the panel level where the selection process takes place, and this enables to study bias more in-depth at the process level. The findings are: (i) After controlling for merit, a consistent pattern of gender bias was found in the scores: women receive significant lower grades than men do. (ii) The scores are an input into the two-step decision-making process, and this study shows bias against women in the first selection decision where 75% of the applications are rejected, and bias in favor of women in the second (final) selection decision. (iii) At the level of individual panels, the analysis shows a mixed pattern of bias: in some panels the odds for women to receive a grant are lower than for men, whereas in other panels we find the opposite, next to panels with gender-neutral decision making. (iv) In the case under study, at an aggregated level the allocation of grants seems balanced. (v) The mixed pattern at panel level seems to relate characteristics such as the panel composition, and the level of gender stereotyping.

Applications,Digital Libraries
Gendered Citation Patterns across Political Science and Social Science Methodology Fields

Michelle L. Dion,Jane Lawrence Sumner,Sara McLaughlin Mitchell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.12

2018-07-01

Political Analysis

Abstract:Accumulated evidence identifies discernible gender gaps across many dimensions of professional academic careers including salaries, publication rates, journal placement, career progress, and academic service. Recent work in political science also reveals gender gaps in citations, with articles written by men citing work by other male scholars more often than work by female scholars. This study estimates the gender gap in citations across political science subfields and across methodological subfields within political science, sociology, and economics. The research design captures variance across research areas in terms of the underlying distribution of female scholars. We expect that subfields within political science and social science disciplines with more women will have smaller gender citation gaps, a reduction of the “Matthew effect” where men’s research is viewed as the most central and important in a field. However, gender citation gaps may persist if a “Matilda effect” occurs whereby women’s research is viewed as less important or their ideas are attributed to male scholars, even as a field becomes more diverse. Analysing all articles published from 2007–2016 in several journals, we find that female scholars are significantly more likely than mixed gender or male author teams to cite research by their female peers, but that these citation rates vary depending on the overall distribution of women in their field. More gender diverse subfields and disciplines produce smaller gender citation gaps, consistent with a reduction in the “Matthew effect”. However, we also observe undercitation of work by women, even in journals that publish mostly female authors. While improvements in gender diversity in academia increase the visibility and impact of scholarly work by women, implicit biases in citation practices in the social sciences persist.

political science
Reducing the gender gap on adolescents' interest in study fields: The impact of perceived changes in ingroup gender norms and gender prototypicality

Vincenzo Iacoviello,Giulia Valsecchi,Matthieu Vétois,Juan M. Falomir-Pichastor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-024-09909-z

2024-04-05

Social Psychology of Education

Abstract:Despite some progress towards gender equality in Western societies, traditional gender norms still shape career choices, perpetuating a gender gap where girls are more likely to pursue traditionally feminine fields like healthcare, elementary education, and domestic roles (HEED), while boys are drawn to masculine domains such as science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). This research investigates whether, and under which conditions, the perception that gender norms are progressively changing towards less gender dichotomy can reduce this gender gap in academic fields. We recruited a sample of 642 high-school students (394 women and 248 men), and experimentally manipulated both the salience of changes in gender norm (stability vs change) and participants' gender prototypicality. The main dependent variable was participants' interest in stereotypically feminine (HEED) and masculine (STEM) academic fields. The results indicated a slight decrease in the gender gap for stereotypically feminine fields (HEED) among participants who saw themselves as typical members of their gender group, but no significant change was observed for stereotypically masculine fields (STEM). These findings suggest that shifting perceptions of gender norms may have a limited effect on modifying traditional educational and career choices, underscoring the resilience of entrenched gender stereotypes.

psychology, educational
Assessing Gender Bias in the Information Systems Field: An Analysis of the Impact on Citations

Silvia Masiero,Aleksi Aaltonen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2108.12255

2021-08-23

Abstract:Gender bias, a systemic and unfair difference in how men and women are treated in a given domain, is widely studied across different academic fields. Yet, there are barely any studies of the phenomenon in the field of academic information systems (IS), which is surprising especially in the light of the proliferation of such studies in the Science, Technology, Mathematics and Technology (STEM) disciplines. To assess potential gender bias in the IS field, this paper outlines a study to estimate the impact of scholarly citations that female IS academics accumulate vis-à-vis their male colleagues. Drawing on a scientometric study of the 7,260 papers published in the most prestigious IS journals (known as the AIS Basket of Eight), our analysis aims to unveil potential bias in the accumulation of citations between genders in the field. We use panel regression to estimate the gendered citations accumulation in the field. By doing so we propose to contribute knowledge on a core dimension of gender bias in academia, which is, so far, almost completely unexplored in the IS field.

Computers and Society
Exploring teachers’ and students’ gender role bias and students’ confidence in STEM fields

Sarah Hand,Lindsay Rice,Eric Greenlee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9408-8

2017-10-16

Social Psychology of Education

Abstract:There is a shortfall of girls and women pursuing STEM disciplines, a deficit that may be partially attributed to subtle forms of bias that are tied to traditional gender role stereotypes. The current study examined these subtle biases in high school teachers and students in two ways: by asking teachers and students to attribute masculine and feminine traits to the typical scientist or humanities professional, and by inquiring about the academic performance assumed of boys and girls. In addition, students were surveyed about their own self-efficacy in math and science courses and gender-balanced teaching initiatives present in the classroom. Results showed that teachers and students exhibited subtle bias by attributing more masculine characteristics to a scientist and feminine characteristics to the humanities. Teachers and students also reported their belief that boys tend to perform better than girls in STEM disciplines. Finally, our results echoed previous literature examining self-efficacy discrepancies for girls in math and science classes, and indicated a lack of gender-balanced teaching initiatives in math and science classes. These results have broad implications for the lack of women in STEM disciplines, and they also reveal a potential means of classroom intervention to help counteract these subtle forms of bias.

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

Amanda J. Koch,Susan D. D’Mello,Paul R. Sackett,Susan D. D'Mello

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036734

IF: 11.8025

2015-01-01

Journal of Applied Psychology

Abstract:Gender bias continues to be a concern in many work settings, leading researchers to identify factors that influence workplace decisions. In this study we examine several of these factors, using an organizing framework of sex distribution within jobs (including male- and female-dominated jobs as well as sex-balanced, or integrated, jobs). We conducted random effects meta-analyses including 136 independent effect sizes from experimental studies (N = 22,348) and examined the effects of decision-maker gender, amount and content of information available to the decision maker, type of evaluation, and motivation to make careful decisions on gender bias in organizational decisions. We also examined study characteristics such as type of participant, publication year, and study design. Our findings revealed that men were preferred for male-dominated jobs (i.e., gender-role congruity bias), whereas no strong preference for either gender was found for female-dominated or integrated jobs. Second, male raters exhibited greater gender-role congruity bias than did female raters for male-dominated jobs. Third, gender-role congruity bias did not consistently decrease when decision makers were provided with additional information about those they were rating, but gender-role congruity bias was reduced when information clearly indicated high competence of those being evaluated. Fourth, gender-role congruity bias did not differ between decisions that required comparisons among ratees and decisions made about individual ratees. Fifth, decision makers who were motivated to make careful decisions tended to exhibit less gender-role congruity bias for male-dominated jobs. Finally, for male-dominated jobs, experienced professionals showed smaller gender-role congruity bias than did undergraduates or working adults.

psychology, applied,management
Gender bias in teaching evaluations: the causal role of department gender composition

Oriana R. Aragón,Evava S. Pietri,Brian A. Powell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2118466120

2023-01-19

Abstract:Women are underrepresented in academia's higher ranks. Promotion oftentimes requires positive student-provided course evaluations. At a U.S. university, both an archival and an experimental investigation uncovered gender discrimination that affected both men and women. A department's gender composition and the course levels being taught interacted to predict biases in evaluations. However, women were disproportionately impacted because women were more often in the gender minority. A subsequent audit of the university's promotion guidelines suggested a disproportionate impact on women's career trajectories. Our framework was guided by role congruity theory, which poses that workplace positions are gendered by the ratios of men and women who fill them. We hypothesized that students would expect educators in a department's gender majority to fill more so essential positions of teaching upper-level courses and those in the minority to fill more so supportive positions of teaching lower-level courses. Consistent with role congruity theory when an educator's gender violated expected gendered roles, we generally found discrimination in the form of lower evaluation scores. A follow-up experiment demonstrated that it was possible to change students' expectations about which gender would teach their courses. When we assigned students randomly to picture themselves as students in a male-dominated, female-dominated, or gender-parity department, we shifted their expectations of whether men or women would teach upper- and lower-level courses. Violating students' expectations created negative biases in teaching evaluations. This provided a causal link between department gender composition and discrimination. The importance of gender representation and ameliorating strategies are discussed.

multidisciplinary sciences
Gender and cultural bias in student evaluations: Why representation matters

Y. Fan,L. J. Shepherd,E. Slavich,D. Waters,M. Stone,R. Abel,E. L. Johnston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209749

IF: 3.7

2019-02-13

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Gendered and racial inequalities persist in even the most progressive of workplaces. There is increasing evidence to suggest that all aspects of employment, from hiring to performance evaluation to promotion, are affected by gender and cultural background. In higher education, bias in performance evaluation has been posited as one of the reasons why few women make it to the upper echelons of the academic hierarchy. With unprecedented access to institution-wide student survey data from a large public university in Australia, we investigated the role of conscious or unconscious bias in terms of gender and cultural background. We found potential bias against women and teachers with non-English speaking backgrounds. Our findings suggest that bias may decrease with better representation of minority groups in the university workforce. Our findings have implications for society beyond the academy, as over 40% of the Australian population now go to university, and graduates may carry these biases with them into the workforce.

multidisciplinary sciences
Women Experts and Gender Bias in Political Media

Adam L Ozer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad011

2023-05-11

Public Opinion Quarterly

Abstract:Widely held gender stereotypes present obstacles for women experts, who are generally evaluated less positively than equally qualified men across a range of fields. While audiences may view women as better equipped to handle certain feminine-stereotyped issues, Role Congruency Theory suggests that expert authority in politics may be incongruent with traditional feminine gender roles, leading to a subsequent backlash. Building upon the latter theory, I hypothesize that when cued to consider the expertise of a news source, the (in)congruence of gender-stereotyped roles will activate gender biases which increase the gap in evaluations and trust of women and men. Using selection experiments, I assess the relationship between domain-relevant expertise and gender biases across a range of gender-stereotyped issues. I find that women experts are rewarded less for additional expertise and punished more severely for a lack of expertise, exacerbating gender-based biases relative to the control. I find that this pattern is consistent across both masculine- and feminine-stereotyped issues, including issues that disproportionately impact women, such as women’s health care and the gender wage gap. The addition of competing partisan cues, however, overwhelms the influence of gender. The normative implications suggest women in the media often face an uphill battle to advocate for their interests on key issues that affect them even when they may have more direct relevant experience in addition to their qualifications.

political science,social sciences, interdisciplinary,communication
Gender disparities in UK research publishing: Differences between fields, methods and topics

Mike Thelwall,Mahshid Abdoli,Anna Lebiedziewicz,Carol Bailey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.jul.15

2020-07-21

El Profesional de la información

Abstract:Gender disparities persist in UK research, with female minorities in most science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects but female majorities in others. The nature of the gender disparity differences between subjects needs to be understood if effective remedial actions are to be targeted at STEM subjects suffering from a lack of women, in contrast to other subjects without shortages. Evidence from the USA suggests that women engage more in people-related subjects, qualitative methods, veterinary science and cell biology and men engage more in thing-related subjects, power/control fields, patient-related research, abstraction and quantitative methods, except surveys. This article investigates gender disparity differences in UK first authorship for journal articles in nearly all of science split into 26 broad and 308 narrow Scopus fields. The results largely replicate the USA but suggest that more life science topics may be female-associated in the UK and patient-related research might not be male-associated. UK STEM gender parity initiatives might therefore emphasise people-oriented, and perhaps socially positive, aspects of currently masculine STEM topics and approaches (e.g., abstraction, mathematical quantitative methods), and promote female-friendly topics, methods and goals within male-dominated fields in addition to tacking implicit and explicit sexism and providing a supportive working environment.
Explaining Gender Differences in Academics' Career Trajectories

Aniko Hannak,Kenneth Joseph,Andrei Cimpian,Daniel B. Larremore

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.10830

2020-09-23

Abstract:Academic fields exhibit substantial levels of gender segregation. To date, most attempts to explain this persistent global phenomenon have relied on limited cross-sections of data from specific countries, fields, or career stages. Here we used a global longitudinal dataset assembled from profiles on <a class="link-external link-http" href="http://ORCID.org" rel="external noopener nofollow">this http URL</a> to investigate which characteristics of a field predict gender differences among the academics who leave and join that field. Only two field characteristics consistently predicted such differences: (1) the extent to which a field values raw intellectual talent ("brilliance") and (2) whether a field is in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Women more than men moved away from brilliance-oriented and STEM fields, and men more than women moved toward these fields. Our findings suggest that stereotypes associating brilliance and other STEM-relevant traits with men more than women play a key role in maintaining gender segregation across academia.

Social and Information Networks
Gender bias in academic recruitment

Giovanni Abramo,Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo,Francesco Rosati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1783-3

2018-12-21

Abstract:It is well known that women are underrepresented in the academic systems of many countries. Gender discrimination is one of the factors that could contribute to this phenomenon. This study considers a recent national academic recruitment campaign in Italy, examining whether women are subject to more or less bias than men. The findings show that no gender-related differences occur among the candidates who benefit from positive bias, while among those candidates affected by negative bias, the incidence of women is lower than that of men. Among the factors that determine success in a competition for an academic position, the number of the applicant's career years in the same university as the committee members assumes greater weight for male candidates than for females. Being of the same gender as the committee president is also a factor that assumes greater weight for male applicants. On the other hand, for female applicants, the presence of a full professor in the same university with the same family name as the candidate assumes greater weight than for male candidates.

Digital Libraries,Physics and Society
Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals

Flaminio Squazzoni,Giangiacomo Bravo,Mike Farjam,Ana Marusic,Bahar Mehmani,Michael Willis,Aliaksandr Birukou,Pierpaolo Dondio,Francisco Grimaldo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd0299

IF: 13.6

2021-01-06

Science Advances

Abstract:No evidence that women are penalized in peer review and editorial processes, finds study on 145 journals in multiple disciplines.

multidisciplinary sciences

Gender bias might be working at level of whole disciplines

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

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

Bias against research on gender bias

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

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

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

Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions

Gender differences in research grant allocation -- a mixed picture

Gendered Citation Patterns across Political Science and Social Science Methodology Fields

Reducing the gender gap on adolescents' interest in study fields: The impact of perceived changes in ingroup gender norms and gender prototypicality

Assessing Gender Bias in the Information Systems Field: An Analysis of the Impact on Citations

Exploring teachers’ and students’ gender role bias and students’ confidence in STEM fields

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

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

Gender and cultural bias in student evaluations: Why representation matters

Women Experts and Gender Bias in Political Media

Gender disparities in UK research publishing: Differences between fields, methods and topics

Explaining Gender Differences in Academics' Career Trajectories

Gender bias in academic recruitment

Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals