GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Williams, Wendy M.  (3)
  • Biodiversity Research  (3)
  • Linguistics  (3)
Material
Person/Organisation
Language
Years
FID
  • Biodiversity Research  (3)
  • Linguistics  (3)
Subjects(RVK)
  • 1
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ; 2011
    In:  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol. 108, No. 21 ( 2011-05-24)
    In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 108, No. 21 ( 2011-05-24)
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0027-8424 , 1091-6490
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
    Publication Date: 2011
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 209104-5
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1461794-8
    SSG: 11
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ; 2015
    In:  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol. 112, No. 17 ( 2015-04-28), p. 5360-5365
    In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 112, No. 17 ( 2015-04-28), p. 5360-5365
    Abstract: National randomized experiments and validation studies were conducted on 873 tenure-track faculty (439 male, 434 female) from biology, engineering, economics, and psychology at 371 universities/colleges from 50 US states and the District of Columbia. In the main experiment, 363 faculty members evaluated narrative summaries describing hypothetical female and male applicants for tenure-track assistant professorships who shared the same lifestyle (e.g., single without children, married with children). Applicants' profiles were systematically varied to disguise identically rated scholarship; profiles were counterbalanced by gender across faculty to enable between-faculty comparisons of hiring preferences for identically qualified women versus men. Results revealed a 2:1 preference for women by faculty of both genders across both math-intensive and non–math-intensive fields, with the single exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference. Results were replicated using weighted analyses to control for national sample characteristics. In follow-up experiments, 144 faculty evaluated competing applicants with differing lifestyles (e.g., divorced mother vs. married father), and 204 faculty compared same-gender candidates with children, but differing in whether they took 1-y-parental leaves in graduate school. Women preferred divorced mothers to married fathers; men preferred mothers who took leaves to mothers who did not. In two validation studies, 35 engineering faculty provided rankings using full curricula vitae instead of narratives, and 127 faculty rated one applicant rather than choosing from a mixed-gender group; the same preference for women was shown by faculty of both genders. These results suggest it is a propitious time for women launching careers in academic science. Messages to the contrary may discourage women from applying for STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) tenure-track assistant professorships.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0027-8424 , 1091-6490
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
    Publication Date: 2015
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 209104-5
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1461794-8
    SSG: 11
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ; 2011
    In:  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol. 108, No. 8 ( 2011-02-22), p. 3157-3162
    In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 108, No. 8 ( 2011-02-22), p. 3157-3162
    Abstract: Explanations for women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields of science often focus on sex discrimination in grant and manuscript reviewing, interviewing, and hiring. Claims that women scientists suffer discrimination in these arenas rest on a set of studies undergirding policies and programs aimed at remediation. More recent and robust empiricism, however, fails to support assertions of discrimination in these domains. To better understand women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields and its causes, we reprise claims of discrimination and their evidentiary bases. Based on a review of the past 20 y of data, we suggest that some of these claims are no longer valid and, if uncritically accepted as current causes of women's lack of progress, can delay or prevent understanding of contemporary determinants of women's underrepresentation. We conclude that differential gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices, whether free or constrained, and that such choices could be influenced and better informed through education if resources were so directed. Thus, the ongoing focus on sex discrimination in reviewing, interviewing, and hiring represents costly, misplaced effort: Society is engaged in the present in solving problems of the past, rather than in addressing meaningful limitations deterring women's participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers today. Addressing today's causes of underrepresentation requires focusing on education and policy changes that will make institutions responsive to differing biological realities of the sexes. Finally, we suggest potential avenues of intervention to increase gender fairness that accord with current, as opposed to historical, findings.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0027-8424 , 1091-6490
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
    Publication Date: 2011
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 209104-5
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1461794-8
    SSG: 11
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...