Scientific Diversity Interventions

Moss‐Racusin, Corinne A.; Toorn, Jojanneke van der; Dovidio, John F.; Brescoll, Victoria L.; Graham, Mark; Handelsman, Jo

doi:10.1126/science.1245936

Cited by 158 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

176

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, MossRacusin et al have developed an evidence-based framework for creating, evaluating, and implementing diversity interventions designed to increase awareness of and reduce bias across STEM fields (31). Initial evidence reveals promising results for interventions adhering to these guidelines (31). These efforts, along with others that can help individuals actually acknowledge evidence demonstrating gender bias in STEM, are critical in bringing about change and increasing the participation of women in STEM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shields et al (55) created a "WAGES" game and accompanying discussion platform that effectively highlights male privilege and advantage among STEM faculty and helps reduce reactance to acknowledging this advantage (56). Finally, MossRacusin et al have developed an evidence-based framework for creating, evaluating, and implementing diversity interventions designed to increase awareness of and reduce bias across STEM fields (31). Initial evidence reveals promising results for interventions adhering to these guidelines (31).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, the National Institutes of Health called for reducing subtle biases and broadening participation in STEM fields (29) and issued at least three large new requests for proposals to help accomplish this goal (30). Indeed, there are growing numbers of research studies, calls to action, strategic plans, and even resources to systematically document, understand, and hopefully ameliorate gender biases within STEM to create a thriving, diverse, and equitable scientific community (31)(32)(33)(34). However, are people generally (e.g., taxpayers, voters, government officials, etc.)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder

Handley

Brown

Moss‐Racusin

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

208

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientists are trained to evaluate and interpret evidence without bias or subjectivity. Thus, growing evidence revealing a gender bias against women-or favoring men-within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) settings is provocative and raises questions about the extent to which gender bias may contribute to women's underrepresentation within STEM fields. To the extent that research illustrating gender bias in STEM is viewed as convincing, the culture of science can begin to address the bias. However, are men and women equally receptive to this type of experimental evidence? This question was tested with three randomized, double-blind experiments-two involving samples from the general public (n = 205 and 303, respectively) and one involving a sample of university STEM and non-STEM faculty (n = 205). In all experiments, participants read an actual journal abstract reporting gender bias in a STEM context (or an altered abstract reporting no gender bias in experiment 3) and evaluated the overall quality of the research. Results across experiments showed that men evaluate the gender-bias research less favorably than women, and, of concern, this gender difference was especially prominent among STEM faculty (experiment 2). These results suggest a relative reluctance among men, especially faculty men within STEM, to accept evidence of gender biases in STEM. This finding is problematic because broadening the participation of underrepresented people in STEM, including women, necessarily requires a widespread willingness (particularly by those in the majority) to acknowledge that bias exists before transformation is possible.gender bias | science workforce | diversity | science education | sexism O bjectivity is a fundamental value in the practice of science and is required to optimally assess one's own research findings, others' findings, and the merits of others' abilities and ideas (1). For example, when scientists evaluate data collected on a potentially controversial topic (such as climate change), they strive to set aside their own belief systems and instead focus solely on the strength of the data and conclusions warranted. Similarly, when scientists evaluate a resume for a laboratory-manager position or assess the importance of a conference submission, the gender of the applicant or author should be immaterial. If they are truly objective, scientists should focus only on the relevant criteria of applicant qualifications or research merit.However, despite rigorous training in the objective evaluation of information and resultant values (2), people working and learning within the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) community are still prone to the same subtle biases that subvert objectivity and distort accurate perceptions of scientific evidence by the general public (3, 4). We focus here on the robust gender biases documented repeatedly within the psychological literature (5-7). Some within the STEM community have turned to these methods and ideas as an explanation for the c...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder

Handley

Brown

Moss‐Racusin

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

208

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This perception might be reinforced by stereotypes or implicit biases against women in science. Moss-Racusin et al (2012) sent science faculty identical resumes for a laboratory manager position in which only the name and gender of the applicant were changed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An advisor like me? Advisor gender and post-graduate careers in science

Gaulé

Piacentini

2018

Research Policy

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. Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but IZA takes no institutional policy positions. The IZA research network is committed to the IZA Guiding Principles of Research Integrity. The IZA Institute of Labor Economics is an independent economic research institute that conducts research in labor economics and offers evidence-based policy advice on labor market issues. Supported by the Deutsche Post Foundation, IZA runs the world's largest network of economists, whose research aims to provide answers to the global labor market challenges of our time. Our key objective is to build bridges between academic research, policymakers and society. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. We investigate whether having an advisor of the same gender is correlated with the productivity of PhD science students and their propensity to stay in academic science. Terms of use: Documents inOur analysis is based on an original dataset covering nearly 20,000 PhD graduates and their advisors from U.S. chemistry departments. We find that students with an advisor of the same gender tend to be more productive during the PhD and more likely to become professors themselves. We suggest that the under-representation of women in science and engineering faculty positions may perpetuate itself through the lower availability of samegender advisors for female students. JEL Classification:J24, J16, I23, O31

show abstract

“…Stratification of classrooms, laboratories, study groups, and so forth can occur along many lines-socioeconomic, gender, race, sexual orientation/identity, religion, cultural background, attitudes, and even by athletic team [1][2][3][4]. Social psychology research indicates that this stratification is part of the human experience and is typically implicit [1,5] but can hinder student performance and persistence [6][7][8][9][10].One challenge in any classroom is to be cognizant of the potential stratification and marginalization of students, most insidiously by other students. In lecture-based classes, it might not be apparent to the instructor that marginalization is occurring, but when students leave the classroom to work on assignments-when professors can't see-stratification and marginalization happens whether faculty acknowledge it or not [11,12].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social ecology of the classroom: Issues of inclusivity

Furge

2014

Biochem Molecular Bio Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When I was an undergraduate my physical chemistry professor assigned weekly problem sets to be completed outside of class. We were encouraged to work together in small groups, but each student had to submit their own work-and, of course, be responsible for knowing the material for exams. Self-selected study groups spontaneously formed within the first week of classes. Having been on study abroad the previous year, I found myself in a group with a good friend who had also been on study abroad and another friend who I knew would be a strong contributor. We met faithfully one evening a week in a study room in the chemistry department to work through problems together after we had already worked on them on our own.After several weeks a fourth person whom I did not know showed up at our study group. My first reaction was, "Hey, what is he doing here? Our group doesn't need anyone else." Against my minor (privately held) objections he started working regularly with us and I found it reassuring that he had many of the same questions that I did. But it was the differences in his approach to answering these questions that I found most useful. He ended up being a great member of our team. My first impression of this person whom I never had worked with or spoken with before, totally changed when he was given a chance to contribute. From him, and the other members of my group, I learned a tremendous amount of chemistry, and a tremendous amount about learning.But what if the fourth person had not been welcomed to the group? What if we had excluded him because he wasn't in our social circle, he wasn't of our social class, he wasn't from our country, or he wasn't of our race? Stratification of classrooms, laboratories, study groups, and so forth can occur along many lines-socioeconomic, gender, race, sexual orientation/identity, religion, cultural background, attitudes, and even by athletic team [1][2][3][4]. Social psychology research indicates that this stratification is part of the human experience and is typically implicit [1,5] but can hinder student performance and persistence [6][7][8][9][10].One challenge in any classroom is to be cognizant of the potential stratification and marginalization of students, most insidiously by other students. In lecture-based classes, it might not be apparent to the instructor that marginalization is occurring, but when students leave the classroom to work on assignments-when professors can't see-stratification and marginalization happens whether faculty acknowledge it or not [11,12]. In a lecture course, the instructor has little recourse other than to let students be responsible for taking ownership of their learning and getting involved, as appropriate, with other students. But what if they don't, or are excluded based on who they are or the color of their skin?A student-centered classroom gives instructors a unique opportunity to create learning communities in the classroom and then to observe and even influence complex social dynamics [6-8, 10, 13, 14]. Active, cooperative learning i...

show abstract

Scientific Diversity Interventions

Abstract: Fair treatment of other scientists is an essential aspect of scientific integrity, warranting diversity interventions.

Cited by 158 publications

References 16 publications

Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder

Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder

An advisor like me? Advisor gender and post-graduate careers in science

Social ecology of the classroom: Issues of inclusivity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About