You are on page 1of 14

1

Gender Bias in the Academy


Julie K. Marsh
College of William and Mary
Introduction
The unintentional and at times unconscious
biases against women in academia has been

Reflection

just as likely as men to make biased

well documented over the years. Several

judgments.

recent studies suggest these acts of


discrimination are representative and go

based on competence, quality, or

The studies reviewed for this project offer

expertise; however, many of the studies

important policy implications for any Human

found changing names or other gender

Resources department, especially in

qualities showed shifts in judgment in

consideration of recruiting, hiring,

favor of men. Research or publications

retention, promotion, and tenure processes.

by men were consistently seen as


superior to the work of women.

The following are points of reflection


of references.

Many of the participants in the studies


believed they were making choices

beyond anecdotal.

stemming from the studies found in the list

It is important to note that women are

The implications are both broad and


specific to certain disciplines.
2

Cultural factors also perpetuate gender bias within academia. Gender


biases stem directly from perceived cultural stereotypes that portray
men as competent and successful and women as lesser than. Culture is
important within an academic department as well, and academic
stereotypes that also portray women as less competent are pervasive.

There are many ways Human Resources departments can counteract


gender biases in academia. There must be structured, institutional
efforts in terms of recruiting, hiring, retention, and tenure and
promotion.

The studies showed the need for faculty and administrators to take part
in gender biases training and professional development as well as be
exposed to the data on gender bias.

The studies also showed a greater need for research in the area of
gender bias as well as the intersectionality of gender, race/ethnicity,
sexuality, and disability.

References
Colgan, J. (2015). Gender bias in international relations syllabi. International Studies
Quarterly, 2(1).
King, M.M., Correll, S.J., Jacquet, J., Bergstrom, C.T., & West, J.D. (2015). Men set their
own cites high: Gender and self-citation across fields and over time. American
Sociological Association, 2(1).
Leslie, S-J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance
underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347, 262-265.
MacNell, L., Driscoll, A., & Hunt, A.N. (2015). Whats in a name: Exposing gender bias in
student ratings of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 40(4), 291-303.
- Ipsum
Maliniak, D., Powers, R., & Walter, B.F. (2013). The gender citation gap in international
relations. International Organization, 67. 889-922.
Milkman, K.L, Akinola, M., & Chugh, D. (2014). What happens before? A field experiment
exploring how pay and representation differentially shape bias on the pathway into
organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology (forthcoming). Retrieved from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2063742
Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J., & Handelsman, J. (2012).
Science facultys subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(41), 16474-16479.
doi:10.1073/pnas.1211286109
Newsome, L.J. (2008). The chemistry phd: The impact on womens retention (Research
Report No. 100849). Retrieved from Royal Society of Chemistry website:
http://www.biochemistry.org/Portals/0/SciencePolicy/Docs/Chemistry%20Report%20F
or%20Web.pdf
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Glynn, C.J., & Huge, M. (2013). The matilda effect in science
communication: An experiment on gender bias in publication quality perceptions and
collaboration interest. Science Communication, 35(5), 603-625.
Wilson, R. (2012, October 22). Scholarly publishings gender gap. Chronicle of Higher
Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Hard-NumbersBehind/135236/

Running&head:&ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&

Annotated&Bibliography&on&Women&in&Academia&
&
&
Julie&K.&Marsh&
&
&
College&of&William&and&Mary&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&

1&

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

2&

Annotated&Bibliography&on&Women&in&Academia&
&
Colgan,(J.((2015).(Gender(bias(in(international(relations(syllabi.(International*Studies*
Quarterly,*2(1).((
(
&
This&study&looked&at&different&types&of&syllabi&within&international&relations&courses&
in&higher&education&and&found&different&types&of&readings&were&assigned&based&on&whether&
a&course&was&taught&by&a&male&or&female&instructor.&&The&study&found&female&instructors&
assigned&more&readings&by&female&authors&when&compared&to&their&male&instructor&
counterparts.&&In&fact,&men&or&allOmale&teams&authored&only&71.5%&of&readings&in&courses&
taught&by&female&instructors.&&In&contrast,&men&or&allOmale&teams&authored&79.1%&of&
readings&in&courses&taught&by&male&instructors.&&These&differences&are&statistically&
significant:&female&instructors&assign&36%&more&readings&by&female&authors&than&male&
instructors.&&Additionally,&female&instructors&shy&away&from&assigning&their&own&research&
as&course&readings,&whereas&male&instructors&assigned&twice&as&much&of&their&own&research.&&&
&

The&implications&suggest&students&in&the&female&instructors&courses&are&receiving&a&

more&wellOrounded&education&just&based&on&the&readings&they&are&exposed&to&in&comparison&
with&male&instructors&students.&&It&is&also&concerning&that&female&instructors&do&not&feel&the&
need&to&share&their&own&research&with&their&students&which&could&further&their&students&
education.&
&
&
&
&&&
(
(
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

3&

Leslie,(S<J.,(Cimpian,(A.,(Meyer,(M.,(&(Freeland,(E.((2015).(Expectations(of(brilliance(
underlie(gender(distributions(across(academic(disciplines.(Science,*347,(262<
265.(
(
&
This&study&looked&at&female&representation&at&the&PhD&level&across&a&variety&of&
science&areas&connected&to&STEM.&&The&researchers&found&there&is&a&gender&imbalance&in&
STEM&subjects&in&academia.&&Women&are&well&represented&at&the&PhD&level&in&some&sciences,&
but&women&are&poorly&represented&in&areas&of&humanities&studies.&&For&instance,&54%&of&
molecular&biology&PhDs&are&women&when&compared&to&31%&of&female&PhDs&in&philosophy.&&
Using&a&nationwide&survey&of&academics,&the&researchers&tested&their&hypotheses&regarding&
general&attitudes&about&the&representation&in&different&fields.&&Surveys&showed&some&fields&
required&attributes&like&genius&or&brilliance&and&other&fields&valued&empathy&and&hard&
work.&&&
The&researchers&questioned&the&underrepresented&areas,&specifically&where&innate&
talent&is&valued,&and&they&found&women&are&underrepresented&because&they&are&
stereotyped&to&not&possess&the&innate&talent&needed&in&the&area.&&The&researchers&
hypothesis&also&extended&to&race,&specifically&African&American,&representation&as&certain&
races&are&also&stereotyped&to&not&have&the&innate&talent&necessary.&&
&
&
&
&
&
&
(
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

4&

MacNell,(L.,(Driscoll,(A.,(&(Hunt,(A.N.((2015).(Whats(in(a(name:(Exposing(gender(bias(
in(student(ratings(of(teaching.(Innovative*Higher*Education,*40(4),(291<303.(
(
&
This&study&focused&on&the&evaluations&of&two&professors,&one&male&and&one&female,&
stemming&from&four&sections&of&an&online&course.&&The&43&participants&were&divided&into&
four&discussion&groups&of&8O12&students&each.&&The&male&instructor&led&two&groups&while&the&
female&instructor&led&two&groups.&&The&female&instructor&told&her&groups&she&was&male,&and&
the&male&instructor&told&his&groups&he&was&female.&&The&participants&were&then&asked&to&
evaluate&their&professors&at&the&end&of&the&course&based&on&12&characteristics&ranging&from&
effectiveness&to&interpersonal&skills.&&Evaluations&are&used&within&higher&education&to&
determine&hiring,&promotion,&and&tenure&so&they&are&highly&valued&among&faculty&and&
administrators,&so&the&results&were&worrisome.&
&

The&participants&who&thought&they&had&a&male&instructor&rated&their&instructor&

higher&on&all&12&characteristics,&and&the&participants&who&thought&they&had&a&female&
instructor&rated&their&instructor&much&lower&across&the&12&characteristics.&&Additionally,&the&
male&instructor&received&much&higher&marks&for&maleOoriented&characteristics&such&as&
professionalism,&fairness,&and&promptness.&&&
&
&
&
&
&&&
&
(
(
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

5&

Maliniak,(D.,(Powers,(R.,(&(Walter,(B.F.((2013).(The(gender(citation(gap(in(
international(relations.(International*Organization,*67.(889<922.(
(
&
This&study&explored&the&citation&and&publication&patterns&between&men&and&women&
in&the&international&relations&literature.&&The&researchers&were&able&to&show&women&are&
cited&less&often&than&men&after&controlling&for&variables&including&institutional&affiliation,&
year&of&publication,&venue&of&publication,&theoretical&perspective,&focus&of&publication,&
methodology,&and&tenure&status.&&The&researchers&used&the&data&from&the&Teaching,&
Research,&and&International&Policy&project&on&peer&reviewed&publications&between&1980&
and&2006&to&look&across&citations&and&publications&in&the&international&relations&literature.&&&
&

The&researchers&also&used&network&analysis&to&explore&how&gender&of&an&author&

impacts&the&articles&centrality&in&the&network&of&citations&within&the&sample&from&the&
Teaching,&Research,&and&International&Policy&project.&&Female&authors&are&less&central&
within&the&network&of&citations&when&compared&to&male&authors.&&The&researchers&noted&it&
was&likely&for&women&to&be&less&central&because&women&cite&themselves&less&than&men&and&
men&tend&to&cite&more&men&than&women.&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
(
(
(
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

6&

Milkman,(K.L,(Akinola,(M.,(&(Chugh,(D.((2014).(What(happens(before?(A(field(
experiment(exploring(how(pay(and(representation(differentially(shape(bias(on(
the(pathway(into(organizations.(Journal(of(Applied(Psychology((forthcoming).(
Retrieved(from(
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2063742((
(
&
This&study&pointed&out&issues&when&applying&to&organizations&or&institutions&based&
on&race&and&gender.&&The&study&audited&over&6,500&professors&from&89&disciplines&and&259&
institutions.&&The&study&used&fictional&prospective&students&seeking&research&opportunities&
prior&to&applying&to&a&doctoral&program.&&The&names&were&randomly&assigned&to&signal&race&
and&gender,&specifically&Caucasian,&Black,&Hispanic,&Indian,&and&Chinese,&but&the&messages&
in&the&letters&sent&were&identical.&&The&study&looked&at&faculty&responsiveness,&specifically&
when&letters&of&interest&were&sent&to&professors&the&study&gauged&the&level&of&
responsiveness&based&on&race&and&gender.&&The&study&looked&across&disciplines,&including&
education,&social&sciences,&business,&life&science,&humanities,&and&fine&arts.&&In&all&of&the&
disciplines,&except&fine&arts,&the&letters&of&interest&were&signed&with&names&traditionally&
associated&with&white&males.&&For&instance,&Brad&Anderson&versus&Juanita&Martinez.&&The&
white&male&names&were&more&likely&to&receive&a&response&from&a&faculty&member.&&In&
business,&the&disparity&was&the&most&extreme,&and&the&responses&to&letters&with&names&of&
white&males&increased&by&25%&when&compared&to&letters&with&names&of&minority&female&or&
males.&
&
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

7&

(
Moss<Racusin,(C.A.,(Dovidio,(J.F.,(Brescoll,(V.L.,(Graham,(M.J.,(&(Handelsman,(J.((2012).(
Science(facultys(subtle(gender(biases(favor(male(students.(Proceedings*of*the*
National*Academy*of*Sciences*of*the*United*States*of*America,*109(41),(16474<
16479.(doi:(10.1073/pnas.1211286109(
(
&
This&randomized,&doubleOblind&study&found&both&male&and&female&faculty&members&
exhibited&a&bias&toward&female&undergraduate&students&by&evaluating&them&as&less&
competent,&hireable,&and/or&qualified&as&well&as&by&offering&female&undergraduate&students&
less&funding&and&support.&&Using&application&materials,&the&study&reported&a&candidate&for&a&
laboratory&manager&position&was&deemed&more&competent,&hireable,&and&qualified&if&they&
had&a&male&name.&&Identical&application&materials&with&female&names&were&judged&as&less&
qualified.&&Additionally,&the&faculty&hiring&committee&responsible&for&selecting&the&chosen&
candidate&offered&a&higher&starting&salary&and&more&support&to&male&applicants.&&Gender&
bias&was&found&in&both&male&and&female&faculty&members.&&&&&
The&authors&noted&bias&is&typically&unintentional&or&implicit&based&on&repeated&
experiences&and&exposure&to&cultural&stereotypes&that&portray&women&as&less&competent&
than&men.&&The&authors&also&noted&disciplines&that&highly&value&objectivity,&such&as&the&
sciences,&are&susceptible&to&gender&bias.&&Finally,&the&authors&noted&these&perceived&
negative&biases&do&affect&womens&career&decisions&and&future&opportunities&for&extending&
their&education&in&the&sciences.&&&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

8&

Newsome,(L.J.((2008).(The*chemistry*phd:*The*impact*on*womens*retention((Research(
Report(No.(100849).(Retrieved(from(Royal(Society(of(Chemistry(website:(
http://www.biochemistry.org/Portals/0/SciencePolicy/Docs/Chemistry%20
Report%20For%20Web.pdf((
&
This&longitudinal&study&reported&large&numbers&of&female&PhD&candidates&in&the&
sciences&find&academic&careers&unappealing,&the&obstacles&they&encounter&disproportionate&
in&comparison&with&their&male&colleagues,&and&the&sacrifices&required&to&stay&in&academia&
too&great.&&The&study&showed&that&at&the&beginning&of&their&PhD&programs,&72%&of&female&
scientists&expressed&interest&in&pursuing&careers&in&research,&whether&in&industry&or&
academia,&with&only&61%&of&male&scientists&expressing&the&same.&&By&the&third&year&of&study,&
the&percentage&of&male&interest&in&research&dropped&from&61%&to&59%;&however,&the&
percentage&for&women&dropped&drastically&from&72%&to&only&37%.&&When&only&focusing&on&
those&who&wanted&to&pursue&a&research&career&in&academia&specifically,&men&were&at&21%&
while&women&were&at&12%.&&&
&

The&study&discussed&specific&issues&female&researchers&faced&over&the&course&of&their&

PhD&programs.&&Many&of&the&issues&tied&to&supervision&(either&too&much&or&too&little),&focus&
on&achievement&over&mastery&of&methodologies,&and&difficult&relationships&within&
departments.&&The&characteristics&of&academic&careers&that&did&not&appeal&to&the&study&
participants&included&the&constant&need&to&apply&for&research&funding,&isolation&within&the&
field,&and&the&need&for&an&academic&career&to&be&allOconsuming.&&The&study&found&women&
were&more&negatively&impacted&than&men&by&the&competition&in&their&field,&a&lack&of&selfO
confidence,&and&the&need&for&frequent&moves&and&lack&of&job&security&when&filling&postO
doctoral&positions&required&in&the&sciences.&&&
&
&
&

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

9&

King,(M.M.,(Correll,(S.J.,(Jacquet,(J.,(Bergstrom,(C.T.,(&(West,(J.D.((2015).(Men(set(their(
own(cites(high:(Gender(and(self<citation(across(fields(and(over(time.(American*
Sociological*Association,(2(1).((
(
(
This&study&focused&on&the&issue&of&selfOcitation&within&scholarly&publication.&&
Typically&10%&of&references&are&selfOcitations&by&a&papers&author(s).&&The&study&found,&&
however,&men&cite&their&own&research&papers&at&much&higher&rates&than&women.&&Using&the&
scholarly&database&JSTOR,&a&dataset&of&over&1.6&million&papers,&the&researchers&looked&at&&
citations&across&a&variety&of&academic&fields.&&Even&though&female&representation&in&&
academia&has&grown&in&recent&years,&the&gender&gap&still&exists&in&selfOcitation&and,&in&fact,&&
has&widened&over&the&last&50&years.&&The&findings&of&this&research&have&major&implications&&
in&higher&education&since&publication,&and&most&especially&citation,&weights&heavily&for&&
hiring,&tenure&and&promotion,&and&salary&negotiation.&&Women&are&put&at&more&and&more&of&&
a&disadvantage&at&each&step&along&the&academic&career&path.&&&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

10&

Knobloch<Westerwick,(S.,(Glynn,(C.J.,(&(Huge,(M.((2013).(The(matilda(effect(in(science(
communication:(An(experiment(on(gender(bias(in(publication(quality(
perceptions(and(collaboration(interest.(Science*Communication,*35(5),(603<
625.((
(
(
This&study&included&243&graduate&students,&70%&of&whom&were&female,&from&
communication&graduate&schools&across&the&United&States.&&The&participants&were&required&
to&read&and&evaluate&15&abstracts&of&real&studies&that&had&been&presented&at&an&academic&
conference.&&The&researchers&listed&either&two&male&authors&or&two&female&authors&so&that&
some&participants&received&abstracts&with&male&authors&and&some&participants&received&
abstracts&with&female&authors.&&The&participants&rated&the&abstracts&across&ten&areas&related&
to&quality&and&using&a&10Opoint&scale&ranging&from&not$at$all&to&very.&&Similar&to&the&Wilson&
(2012)&article&discussed&below,&participants&rated&male&authors&more&highly&than&female&
authors.&&Additionally,&female&participants&also&rated&male&authors&more&highly&than&female&
authors.&&&
&

Abstracts&from&maleOoriented&topics&received&higher&ratings&from&the&participants&if&

the&abstracts&were&associated&with&male&authors&instead&of&female&authors.&&Abstracts&from&
male&authors&also&were&rated&higher&if&they&were&associated&with&maleOoriented&topics&
instead&of&femaleOoriented&topics.&&Participants&were&also&given&the&option&of&discussing&the&
research&with&the&authors.&&Male&authors&drew&more&collaboration&when&their&work&focused&
on&maleOoriented&topics&while&female&authors&drew&more&collaboration&when&their&work&
focused&on&femaleOoriented&topics.&&&&&&
(
(
(
(
(
(

ANNOTATED&BIBLIOGRAPHY&&

&

11&

Wilson,(R.((2012,(October(22).(Scholarly(publishings(gender(gap.(Chronicle*of*Higher*
Education.(Retrieved(from(http://chronicle.com/article/The<Hard<Numbers<
Behind/135236/((
&
This&article&used&data&from&JSTOR&in&order&to&analyze&the&gender&gap&in&scholarly&
publishing.&&The&article&also&analyzes&reasons&for&gender&bias&in&scholarly&publishing,&
including&womens&time&commitments&to&teaching&and&academic&service.&&The&report&
indicated&the&percentage&of&female&authors&is&less&than&womens&overall&representation&
within&fullOtime&faculty&positions,&though&the&author&noted&the&proportion&has&continued&to&
increase&as&women&have&entered&more&and&more&faculty&positions.&&The&data&also&showed&
women&continue&to&be&underrepresented&in&a&variety&of&subfields,&especially&across&the&
sciences,&where&they&especially&are&underrepresented&as&last&author&on&research.&&The&
significance&of&being&listed&as&last&author&shows&seniority:&typically&the&last&author&is&the&
senior&scholar&on&a&research&study&and&is&in&charge&of&the&lab&or&research&environment&and&
other&researchers.&
Publications&and&location&of&authors&names&is&crucial&for&tenure,&especially&in&the&
sciences.&&The&data&showed&women&are&typically&less&assertive&when&negotiating&for&credit&
on&research&and&publications.&&In&fact,&women&are&seen&as&less&feminine&if&they&do&negotiate&
for&themselves.&&It&is&important&to&note&that&women&are&being&listed&as&first&author&more&and&
more,&but&the&increase&is&modest&at&best.&&It&is&the&last&author&listing&that&is&most&crucial,&
especially&because&not&seeing&female&names&in&that&placement&suggests&women&in&science&
are&not&the&ones&to&run&research&labs&or&earn&research&grants.&&&
&
&
&
&
&
&