TOOLS FOR CHANGE: BOOSTING THE RETENTION OF WOMEN IN THE STEM PIPELINE

This study details how gender bias plays out in everyday workplace interactions in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). It is based on in-depth interviews with 60 women scientists of color (chiefly professors), and a survey of 557 women scientists (of all races). Different types of gen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of research in gender studies 2016, Vol.6 (1), p.11-75
Hauptverfasser: Williams, Joan C, Phillips, Katherine W
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 75
container_issue 1
container_start_page 11
container_title Journal of research in gender studies
container_volume 6
creator Williams, Joan C
Phillips, Katherine W
description This study details how gender bias plays out in everyday workplace interactions in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). It is based on in-depth interviews with 60 women scientists of color (chiefly professors), and a survey of 557 women scientists (of all races). Different types of gender bias were reported at different rates. Prescriptive gender bias was most common (76.3% of women interviewed reported it), followed by descriptive gender bias (66.7%) and gender bias triggered by motherhood (64.0%); just over half of the women interviewed (55.3%) reported situations in which gender bias against women fueled conflicts among women. The survey found dramatic differences by race, notably that Black women scientists were more likely than other women to report that they had to prove themselves more than their colleagues, that Asian-American women scientists reported more pressure to behave in feminine ways (and more push-back if they didn’t), and Latina scientists were more likely to be called “angry” or “too emotional” if they behaved assertively. The study concludes by introducing a new approach to organizational change to interrupt gender bias, called Metrics-Based Bias Interrupters.
doi_str_mv 10.22381/JRGS6120161
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>ceeol_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1866648883</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A458550025</galeid><ceeol_id>412569</ceeol_id><sourcerecordid>412569</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3521-258dd4fbbb8fcfb66fdc41312080157586241f4a7e36d62576a38080d952a18c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkU1Lw0AQhoMoWGpvHj0sePFg6n5n662WTRpJs6WJeAz52JWUNKlJe_Dfu7SC4sxhhpnnHV4Yx7lFcIoxEejpdRMkHGGIOLpwRph4wiUM00vbI05diDm-dibDsIU2PEQImo0cP1UqSoCvNmCxnMeBfAYvSiVpGAcgXUqwkamM01DFQPngXa1kDML4tElSuQLrcC2jMJY3zpXJm0FPfurYefNluli6kQrCxTxyS2sFuZiJqqKmKAphSlNwbqqSImJNC4iYxwTHFBmae5rwimPm8ZwIu6tmDOdIlGTsPJzv7vvu86iHQ7arh1I3Td7q7jhkSHDOqRCCWPT-H7rtjn1r3VkKEkYI9ailpmfqI290VremO_R5abPSu7rsWm1qO59TJhiDEDMreDwLyr4bhl6bbN_Xu7z_yhDMTo_I_jzC4nc_uNZd82uBIsz4jHwDvtx5-g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1803533474</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>TOOLS FOR CHANGE: BOOSTING THE RETENTION OF WOMEN IN THE STEM PIPELINE</title><source>Central and Eastern European Online Library - CEEOL Journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Williams, Joan C ; Phillips, Katherine W</creator><creatorcontrib>Williams, Joan C ; Phillips, Katherine W</creatorcontrib><description>This study details how gender bias plays out in everyday workplace interactions in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). It is based on in-depth interviews with 60 women scientists of color (chiefly professors), and a survey of 557 women scientists (of all races). Different types of gender bias were reported at different rates. Prescriptive gender bias was most common (76.3% of women interviewed reported it), followed by descriptive gender bias (66.7%) and gender bias triggered by motherhood (64.0%); just over half of the women interviewed (55.3%) reported situations in which gender bias against women fueled conflicts among women. The survey found dramatic differences by race, notably that Black women scientists were more likely than other women to report that they had to prove themselves more than their colleagues, that Asian-American women scientists reported more pressure to behave in feminine ways (and more push-back if they didn’t), and Latina scientists were more likely to be called “angry” or “too emotional” if they behaved assertively. The study concludes by introducing a new approach to organizational change to interrupt gender bias, called Metrics-Based Bias Interrupters.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2164-0262</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2378-3524</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.22381/JRGS6120161</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Addleton Academic Publishers</publisher><subject>Advisors ; African Americans ; Analysis ; Applied Sociology ; Bias ; Ethnic Minorities Studies ; Gender ; Gender Studies ; Graduate students ; Online instruction ; Organizational change ; Psychologists ; Scientists ; Sexism ; Social differentiation ; STEM education ; Studies ; Surveys ; United States ; White people ; Whites ; Women ; Women scientists ; Workshops</subject><ispartof>Journal of research in gender studies, 2016, Vol.6 (1), p.11-75</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2016 Addleton Academic Publishers</rights><rights>Copyright Addleton Academic Publishers 2016</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3521-258dd4fbbb8fcfb66fdc41312080157586241f4a7e36d62576a38080d952a18c3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Uhttps://www.ceeol.com//api/image/getissuecoverimage?id=picture_2016_26132.jpg</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4024,21362,27923,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Williams, Joan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Katherine W</creatorcontrib><title>TOOLS FOR CHANGE: BOOSTING THE RETENTION OF WOMEN IN THE STEM PIPELINE</title><title>Journal of research in gender studies</title><addtitle>Journal of Research in Gender Studies</addtitle><description>This study details how gender bias plays out in everyday workplace interactions in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). It is based on in-depth interviews with 60 women scientists of color (chiefly professors), and a survey of 557 women scientists (of all races). Different types of gender bias were reported at different rates. Prescriptive gender bias was most common (76.3% of women interviewed reported it), followed by descriptive gender bias (66.7%) and gender bias triggered by motherhood (64.0%); just over half of the women interviewed (55.3%) reported situations in which gender bias against women fueled conflicts among women. The survey found dramatic differences by race, notably that Black women scientists were more likely than other women to report that they had to prove themselves more than their colleagues, that Asian-American women scientists reported more pressure to behave in feminine ways (and more push-back if they didn’t), and Latina scientists were more likely to be called “angry” or “too emotional” if they behaved assertively. The study concludes by introducing a new approach to organizational change to interrupt gender bias, called Metrics-Based Bias Interrupters.</description><subject>Advisors</subject><subject>African Americans</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Applied Sociology</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Ethnic Minorities Studies</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Gender Studies</subject><subject>Graduate students</subject><subject>Online instruction</subject><subject>Organizational change</subject><subject>Psychologists</subject><subject>Scientists</subject><subject>Sexism</subject><subject>Social differentiation</subject><subject>STEM education</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>White people</subject><subject>Whites</subject><subject>Women</subject><subject>Women scientists</subject><subject>Workshops</subject><issn>2164-0262</issn><issn>2378-3524</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>REL</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkU1Lw0AQhoMoWGpvHj0sePFg6n5n662WTRpJs6WJeAz52JWUNKlJe_Dfu7SC4sxhhpnnHV4Yx7lFcIoxEejpdRMkHGGIOLpwRph4wiUM00vbI05diDm-dibDsIU2PEQImo0cP1UqSoCvNmCxnMeBfAYvSiVpGAcgXUqwkamM01DFQPngXa1kDML4tElSuQLrcC2jMJY3zpXJm0FPfurYefNluli6kQrCxTxyS2sFuZiJqqKmKAphSlNwbqqSImJNC4iYxwTHFBmae5rwimPm8ZwIu6tmDOdIlGTsPJzv7vvu86iHQ7arh1I3Td7q7jhkSHDOqRCCWPT-H7rtjn1r3VkKEkYI9ailpmfqI290VremO_R5abPSu7rsWm1qO59TJhiDEDMreDwLyr4bhl6bbN_Xu7z_yhDMTo_I_jzC4nc_uNZd82uBIsz4jHwDvtx5-g</recordid><startdate>2016</startdate><enddate>2016</enddate><creator>Williams, Joan C</creator><creator>Phillips, Katherine W</creator><general>Addleton Academic Publishers</general><scope>AE2</scope><scope>REL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2016</creationdate><title>TOOLS FOR CHANGE: BOOSTING THE RETENTION OF WOMEN IN THE STEM PIPELINE</title><author>Williams, Joan C ; Phillips, Katherine W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3521-258dd4fbbb8fcfb66fdc41312080157586241f4a7e36d62576a38080d952a18c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Advisors</topic><topic>African Americans</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Applied Sociology</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Ethnic Minorities Studies</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Gender Studies</topic><topic>Graduate students</topic><topic>Online instruction</topic><topic>Organizational change</topic><topic>Psychologists</topic><topic>Scientists</topic><topic>Sexism</topic><topic>Social differentiation</topic><topic>STEM education</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>White people</topic><topic>Whites</topic><topic>Women</topic><topic>Women scientists</topic><topic>Workshops</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Williams, Joan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Katherine W</creatorcontrib><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library (C.E.E.O.L.) (DFG Nationallizenzen)</collection><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library - CEEOL Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of research in gender studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Williams, Joan C</au><au>Phillips, Katherine W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>TOOLS FOR CHANGE: BOOSTING THE RETENTION OF WOMEN IN THE STEM PIPELINE</atitle><jtitle>Journal of research in gender studies</jtitle><addtitle>Journal of Research in Gender Studies</addtitle><date>2016</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>11</spage><epage>75</epage><pages>11-75</pages><issn>2164-0262</issn><eissn>2378-3524</eissn><abstract>This study details how gender bias plays out in everyday workplace interactions in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). It is based on in-depth interviews with 60 women scientists of color (chiefly professors), and a survey of 557 women scientists (of all races). Different types of gender bias were reported at different rates. Prescriptive gender bias was most common (76.3% of women interviewed reported it), followed by descriptive gender bias (66.7%) and gender bias triggered by motherhood (64.0%); just over half of the women interviewed (55.3%) reported situations in which gender bias against women fueled conflicts among women. The survey found dramatic differences by race, notably that Black women scientists were more likely than other women to report that they had to prove themselves more than their colleagues, that Asian-American women scientists reported more pressure to behave in feminine ways (and more push-back if they didn’t), and Latina scientists were more likely to be called “angry” or “too emotional” if they behaved assertively. The study concludes by introducing a new approach to organizational change to interrupt gender bias, called Metrics-Based Bias Interrupters.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Addleton Academic Publishers</pub><doi>10.22381/JRGS6120161</doi><tpages>65</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2164-0262
ispartof Journal of research in gender studies, 2016, Vol.6 (1), p.11-75
issn 2164-0262
2378-3524
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1866648883
source Central and Eastern European Online Library - CEEOL Journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library
subjects Advisors
African Americans
Analysis
Applied Sociology
Bias
Ethnic Minorities Studies
Gender
Gender Studies
Graduate students
Online instruction
Organizational change
Psychologists
Scientists
Sexism
Social differentiation
STEM education
Studies
Surveys
United States
White people
Whites
Women
Women scientists
Workshops
title TOOLS FOR CHANGE: BOOSTING THE RETENTION OF WOMEN IN THE STEM PIPELINE
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T04%3A00%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ceeol_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=TOOLS%20FOR%20CHANGE:%20BOOSTING%20THE%20RETENTION%20OF%20WOMEN%20IN%20THE%20STEM%20PIPELINE&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20research%20in%20gender%20studies&rft.au=Williams,%20Joan%20C&rft.date=2016&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=11&rft.epage=75&rft.pages=11-75&rft.issn=2164-0262&rft.eissn=2378-3524&rft_id=info:doi/10.22381/JRGS6120161&rft_dat=%3Cceeol_proqu%3E412569%3C/ceeol_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1803533474&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A458550025&rft_ceeol_id=412569&rfr_iscdi=true