Glass-Ceiling Effect or Cohort Effect? A Longitudinal Study of the Gender Earnings Gap for Engineers, 1982 to 1989

Morgan, Laurie

doi:10.2307/2657263

Cited by 93 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…10 These findings are well-established, although Jackson and O'Callaghan (2009, 472) argue against the majority in saying that in one-third of the studies that found gender disparities in position attainment and promotion, the differences could be attributed to differences other than gender (i.e., "cohort affect" noted by Morgan 1998). Fewer studies have linked race or ethnicity to a lower probability of promotion, although some studies have done so (Fang et al 2000(Fang et al , 1090Ginther and Hayes 2003, 50;Ginther and Kahn 2004, 206;Long and Fox 1995;Toutkoushian 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 76%

Predicting Rank Attainment in Political Science: What Else Besides Publications Affects Promotion?

Hesli

Lee

Mitchell

2012

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report the results of hypotheses tests about the effects of several measures of research, teaching, and service on the likelihood of achieving the ranks of associate and full professor. In conducting these tests, we control for institutional and individual background characteristics. We focus our tests on the link between productivity and academic rank and explore whether this relationship reveals a gender dimension. The analyses are based on an APSA-sponsored survey of all faculty members in departments of political science (government, public affairs, and international relations) in the United States. P romotion decisions are among the most important choices that academic departments make. Generally, promotion from assistant to associate professor brings the decisive reward of tenure-an almost certain guarantee of continuing employment. Wise promotion decisions enhance a department's prestige, while failure to promote a capable scholar means losing talent to another university or possibly an end to a promising academic career (Long, Allison, and McGinnis 1993, 703). Higher rank yields better salaries and more influence within the department.An extensive literature exists on the subject of academic promotion. This literature is based on studies of several different disciplines, from medicine and economics to the social sciences and humanities. Our own analyses of the factors affecting promotion, presented in the second part of this article, are based solely on the discipline of political science. For these analyses, we rely on a 2009 APSA-sponsored survey of all faculty employed in political science departments (including departments of government and public affairs) throughout the United States. (Appendix A provides a description of the survey methodology.) We find that although age (or years of experience) is the best predictor of rank, productivity in terms of publications is a consistently reliable predictor of promotion, except when comparing female assistant to female associate professors. We provide evidence that women are less likely than men to move from assistant professor to associate professor rank. When a woman does achieve associate professor rank, she is as likely as her male colleagues to move on to the rank of full professor. LITERATURE REVIEWAccording to nearly 40-year-old interviews of chairpersons and heads of departments, the criteria used to judge individuals at promotion time are "teaching, research, and public service to the university" (Katz 1973, 470). Such criteria are now enshrined in faculty handbooks and operations manuals for all colleges and universities. Katz's survey also revealed that "research ability, publication record, and national reputation" were "the most important factors influencing salary and promotion decisions" (470). Doering (1972), however, explored the idea that seniority, years of experience, or simply age is the best predictor of promotion-as one generally cannot advance through the ranks without spending a certain amount of time in each rank (see ...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 76%

Predicting Rank Attainment in Political Science: What Else Besides Publications Affects Promotion?

Hesli

Lee

Mitchell

2012

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This represents the metaphor of a 7 ceiling that hinders upward movement and restricts access to offices above a certain level in the organization (Baxter and Wright 2000a; see also Albrecht, Bjorklund and Vroman 2003;Morgan 1998;Prokos and Padavic 2005). This criterion separates the glass ceiling effect from the idea of a "sticky floor," where discrimination makes it harder for minorities to advance beyond the entry level of an organization (e.g., Arulampalam, Booth and Bryan 2007;Kee 2005).…”

Section: Four Criteria For the Glass Ceiling In The Political Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

The Glass Ceiling in Politics: Formalization and Empirical Tests

Folke

Rickne

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may AbstractThere is a scarcity of women and minorities at the apex of political power. This paper formalizes the concept of the glass ceiling for political organizations and builds on previous research to suggest four testable criteria. A glass ceiling exists if women and/or racial minorities (1) are discriminated against in the organization's promotion process and (2) the discrimination increases in severity for the top levels of power and over an individual's career trajectory. We suggest a series of empirical tests for this phenomenon and apply them to longitudinal data on Swedish politicians. Results show that women face a glass ceiling, while minorities' career disadvantages are more severe at the earlier career steps (a "sticky floor"). There is an unequal distribution of political power in most contemporary democracies. Women make up 21.8 percent of the world's parliamentarians, but only 7.8 percent of its heads of government and 5.9 percent of its heads of state (UN Women 2014). Systematic data collection is lacking for racial and ethnic minorities, but previous research has documented a clear underrepresentation in parliaments (Bloemraad 2013), and casual inspection suggests a striking absence from top offices. These patterns constitute an important democratic deficit, and suggest that society may be drawing its leaders from an overly narrow pool of human talent. After all, citizens deserve to be led by the best person, not just the best (white) man, for the job.This paper tests whether the lack of women and minorities in the upper levels of political organizations can be explained by a glass ceiling effect. This is done in two steps. First, we draw on research from different academic disciplines to clearly define the metaphor of the glass ceiling for the political sector and in terms of four testable criteria. Second, we explain and showcase how these criteria can be tested empirically in a case study of Swedish local political organizations.Our paper extends the growing literature on the under-representation of women in political leadership by shifting the focus from macro-systematic explanations of vertical 3 inequality 1 to party-level and micro-level explanations. Compared to most previous work, this entails a shift from country-level data to uniquely detailed panel data for politicians and the nomination decisions among these politicians by hundreds of local party groups. We add a novel perspective to t...

show abstract

“…There is broad interest in the phenomenon of gender inequality in labor market outcomes both in sociology (Morgan 1998;Huffman and Cohen 2004;Barnett et al 2000) and economics (Albrecht et al 2003;Dohmen et al 2004). Numerous studies have adopted the metaphor of a "glass ceiling" when examining whether gender inequality in labor market outcomes is more severe at the top of the reward distribution (Cotter et al 2001;Morgan 1998;Arulampalam et al 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous studies have adopted the metaphor of a "glass ceiling" when examining whether gender inequality in labor market outcomes is more severe at the top of the reward distribution (Cotter et al 2001;Morgan 1998;Arulampalam et al 2007). Most recently, Hassink and Russo (2010) have proposed the idea of a "glass door," where females are particularly disadvantaged in external recruitment to high-level jobs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%