The overarching goal of this research project is to provide a novel contribution to perceived bias research by testing the hypothesis that mere exposure to instances of subtle gender bias in STEM settings can have important effects on observers, depending on whether they recognize such events as gender bias or do not see it as bias. The goal of the first of five experiments was to assess how witnessing subtle gender bias events influences explicit stereotype activation among people who recognize the events as gender stereotyping as well as those who do not. We utilized video materials that were developed and tested in our previous NSF research that show a group of four engineering students, 2 women and 2 men, working together on an engineering design task. There are two versions of the video: one in which the students engaged in subtle gender bias (bias version), and one in which the students engaged in neutral interactions (control version). Over 400 participants were recruited from a large midwestern research university from computer science and engineering majors in which 30% or fewer majors are women. The survey included assessments of perceptions of gender stereotyping in the video, general stereotype endorsement and STEM stereotype endorsement, and three individual difference measures (gender-based rejection sensitivity, sexism sensitivity and negative emotionality) used as covariates in analyses. We found that participants who saw the bias video reported greater explicit stereotyping when they failed to recognize gender bias in the video. When they did recognize bias, they reported explicit stereotyping at levels similar to those in the control condition. This pattern suggests that exposure to subtle gender bias events may have activated gender stereotypes, but when participants recognized the events as gender bias, they tempered their explicit stereotyping.
more »
« less
Does Shared Gender Group Membership Mitigate the Effect of Implicit Bias Attributions on Accountability for Gender-Based Discrimination?
Attributing gender discrimination to implicit bias has become increasingly common. However, research suggests that when discrimination is attributed to implicit rather than explicit bias, the perpetrators are held less accountable and deemed less worthy of punishment. The present work examines (a) whether this effect replicates in the domain of gender discrimination, and (b) whether sharing a group membership with the victim moderates the effect. Four studies revealed that both men and women hold perpetrators of gender discrimination less accountable if their behavior is attributed to implicit rather than explicit bias. Moreover, women held male (Studies 1–3), but not female (Study 4), perpetrators of gender discrimination more accountable than did men. Together, these findings suggest that while shared gender group membership may inform judgments of accountability for gender discrimination, it does not weaken the tendency to hold perpetrators less accountable for discrimination attributed to implicit, compared with explicit, bias.
more » « less- Award ID(s):
- 1941651
- PAR ID:
- 10547367
- Publisher / Repository:
- SAGE Publications
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Volume:
- 47
- Issue:
- 9
- ISSN:
- 0146-1672
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 1343-1357
- Size(s):
- p. 1343-1357
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The overarching goal of this research project is to provide a novel contribution to perceived bias research by testing the hypothesis that mere exposure to instances of subtle gender bias in STEM settings can have important effects on observers, depending on whether they recognize such events as gender bias or do not see it as bias. The goal of the first of five experiments was to assess how witnessing subtle gender bias events influences explicit stereotype activation among people who recognize the events as gender stereotyping as well as those who do not. We utilized video materials that were developed and tested in our previous NSF research that show a group of four engineering students, 2 women and 2 men, working together on an engineering design task. There are two versions of the video: one in which the students engaged in subtle gender bias (bias version), and one in which the students engaged in neutral interactions (control version). Over 400 participants were recruited from a large midwestern research university from computer science and engineering majors in which 30% or fewer majors are women. The survey included assessments of perceptions of gender stereotyping in the video, general stereotype endorsement and STEM stereotype endorsement, and three individual difference measures (gender-based rejection sensitivity, sexism sensitivity and negative emotionality) used as covariates in analyses. We found that participants who saw the bias video reported greater explicit stereotyping when they failed to recognize gender bias in the video. When they did recognize bias, they reported explicit stereotyping at levels similar to those in the control condition. This pattern suggests that exposure to subtle gender bias events may have activated gender stereotypes, but when participants recognized the events as gender bias, they tempered their explicit stereotyping.more » « less
-
Impact of gender on the formation and outcome of formal mentoring relationships in the life sciencesBero, Lisa (Ed.)Despite increasing representation in graduate training programs, a disproportionate number of women leave academic research without obtaining an independent position that enables them to train the next generation of academic researchers. To understand factors underlying this trend, we analyzed formal PhD and postdoctoral mentoring relationships in the life sciences during the years 2000 to 2020. Student and mentor gender are both associated with differences in rates of student’s continuation to positions that allow formal academic mentorship. Although trainees of women mentors are less likely to take on positions as academic mentors than trainees of men mentors, this effect is reduced substantially after controlling for several measurements of mentor status. Thus, the effect of mentor gender can be explained at least partially by gender disparities in social and financial resources available to mentors. Because trainees and mentors tend to be of the same gender, this association between mentor gender and academic continuation disproportionately impacts women trainees. On average, gender homophily in graduate training is unrelated to mentor status. A notable exception to this trend is the special case of scientists having been granted an outstanding distinction, evidenced by membership in the National Academy of Sciences, being a grantee of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, or having been awarded the Nobel Prize. This group of mentors trains men graduate students at higher rates than their most successful colleagues. These results suggest that, in addition to other factors that limit career choices for women trainees, gender inequities in mentors’ access to resources and prestige contribute to women’s attrition from independent research positions.more » « less
-
Universities were established as hierarchical bureaucracies that reward individual attainment in evaluating success. Yet collaboration is crucial both to 21st century science and, we argue, to advancing equity for women academic scientists. We draw from research on gender equity and on collaboration in higher education, and report on data collected on one campus. Sixteen focus group meetings were held with 85 faculty members from STEM departments, separated by faculty rank and gender (i.e., assistant professor men, full professor women). Participants were asked structured questions about the role of collaboration in research, career development, and departmental decision-making. Inductive analyses of focus group data led to the development of a theoretical model in which resources, recognition, and relationships create conditions under which collaboration is likely to produce more gender equitable outcomes for STEM faculty. Ensuring women faculty have equal access to resources is central to safeguarding their success; relationships, including mutual mentoring, inclusion and collegiality, facilitate women’s careers in academia; and recognition of collaborative work bolsters women’s professional advancement. We further propose that gender equity will be stronger in STEM where resources, relationships, and recognition intersect—having multiplicative rather than additive effects. Keywords: collaboration; gender equity; academic STEM careersmore » « less
-
more » « less
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a pervasive public health crisis that impacts individuals across the gender spectrum. Traditionally, IPV is conceptualized through a gendered lens, with men as the perpetrators and women as the victims. The current study explored the association between perpetrator/victim sex, prosecutor gender role attitudes, and prosecutorial decision-making in a case of alleged IPV. We hypothesized that prosecutors with more traditional gender role attitudes would be more lenient, and this effect to be exacerbated in cases involving a female perpetrator. Criminal prosecutors across the United States ( N = 94) completed the Male Role Norms Inventory—Revised and read case materials describing the alleged IPV between a heterosexual couple (e.g., arrest report, medical records). The victim/perpetrator sex was manipulated to involve either a female- (male victim) or male- (female victim) perpetrated IPV case. Results indicate that gender role attitudes were not associated with prosecutorial decision-making. However, prosecutors perceived the violence as more serious and the perpetrator as more likely to reoffend when the perpetrator was male; further, they attributed more blame to the female victim. An interaction between perpetrator sex and prosecutor gender role attitudes indicates those with more traditional beliefs were more likely to blame the female (rather than male) victim. These data suggest extralegal factors related to the perpetrator (i.e., perpetrator sex), rather than prosecutor individual differences (i.e., gender role attitudes), are associated with prosecutor discretionary decision-making. In tandem with real-world disparities in the prosecution of IPV based on perpetrator sex, the current research stresses the importance of exploring a diversity of factors that account for these observed differences.
