Elite male faculty in the life sciences employ fewer women

被引:264
作者
Sheltzer, Jason M. [1 ]
Smith, Joan C. [2 ]
机构
[1] MIT, David H Koch Inst Integrat Canc Res, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[2] Twitter Inc, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
关键词
women in STEM; gender diversity; GENDER-DIFFERENCES; PIPELINE; METAANALYSIS; PREFERENCES; SCIENTISTS; STUDENTS; BIASES;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.1403334111
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Women make up over one-half of all doctoral recipients in biology-related fields but are vastly underrepresented at the faculty level in the life sciences. To explore the current causes of women's under-representation in biology, we collected publicly accessible data from university directories and faculty websites about the composition of biology laboratories at leading academic institutions in the United States. We found that male faculty members tended to employ fewer female graduate students and postdoctoral researchers (postdocs) than female faculty members did. Furthermore, elite male faculty-those whose research was funded by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, who had been elected to the National Academy of Sciences, or who had won a major career award-trained significantly fewer women than other male faculty members. In contrast, elite female faculty did not exhibit a gender bias in employment patterns. New assistant professors at the institutions that we surveyed were largely comprised of postdoctoral researchers from these prominent laboratories, and correspondingly, the laboratories that produced assistant professors had an overabundance of male postdocs. Thus, one cause of the leaky pipeline in biomedical research may be the exclusion of women, or their self-selected absence, from certain high-achieving laboratories.
引用
收藏
页码:10107 / 10112
页数:6
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], WOM MIN PERS DIS SCI
[2]   Evaluating gender biases on actual job performance of real people: A meta-analysis [J].
Bowen, CC ;
Swim, JK ;
Jacobs, RR .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2000, 30 (10) :2194-2215
[3]  
Carpenter S, 2010, SCIENCE
[4]   Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields [J].
Ceci, Stephen J. ;
Williams, Wendy M. .
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2010, 19 (05) :275-279
[5]   Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science [J].
Ceci, Stephen J. ;
Williams, Wendy M. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2011, 108 (08) :3157-3162
[6]   Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments [J].
Correll, SJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, 2001, 106 (06) :1691-1730
[7]  
De Paola M, 2011, GENDER DISCRIMINATIO
[8]   Cumulative advantage as a mechanism for inequality: A review of theoretical and empirical developments [J].
DiPrete, Thomas A. ;
Eirich, Gregory M. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, 2006, 32 :271-297
[9]   Work Preferences, Life Values, and Personal Views of Top Math/Science Graduate Students and the Profoundly Gifted: Developmental Changes and Gender Differences During Emerging Adulthood and Parenthood [J].
Ferriman, Kimberley ;
Lubinski, David ;
Benbow, Camilla P. .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2009, 97 (03) :517-532
[10]   Careers of young scientists: Preferences, prospects and realities by gender and field [J].
Fox, MF ;
Stephan, PE .
SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, 2001, 31 (01) :109-122