Public Release:  How do men and women respond to gender bias in STEM?

SAGE Publications

IMAGE

IMAGE: This is a PWQ cover. view more

Credit: SAGE

Los Angeles, CA (January 8, 2015) Research has revealed that gender biases limit the opportunities for women within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. But just how prevalent are these biases and how are they perceived differently by men and women? A new study out today in Psychology of Women Quarterly examined a well-known space for candid sharing of thoughts - the comments sections of online articles - and found that men are much less likely to agree with scientific evidence of gender bias in STEM than women.

Researchers Corinne Moss-Racusin, Aneta Molenda, and Charlotte Cramer analyzed 831 public comments made on three online news articles (from the New York Times, Discover Magazine Blog, and the IFL Science blog) that reported experimental evidence of gender bias within some areas of scientists. They found that men were more likely to respond negatively to these articles than women. Specifically:

  • 9.5% of the comments argued that sexism does not exist; 68% of these commenters were men.
  • 67.4% of the comments agreed that gender bias exists; of these 29% were men
  • 22% of all of the comments justified the existence of gender bias.
    • Of these comments, between 79% and 88% were made by men.
    • 59.8% justified gender bias using biological explanations, 29.6% used non-biological explanations, and 10.6% justified gender bias stating that women perpetrate it by discriminating against other women.
  • 7.6% of the comments argued that sexism targets men more than women; 65% of these commenters were men.
  • 100% of the comments expressing gratitude for the study were made by women.
  • Only .5% of the comments mentioned that their minds were changed about gender bias after reading the article; of these 67% were made by men.
  • 11.2% of the comments expressed a call for social change, of these 46% were made by men.

The researchers also studied any sexist remarks made by men and women in the comments:

  • 7% of all of the comments included sexist remarks; of these, 76.8% were against women and 23.2% were against men.
    • Of the sexist remarks made against women, 95% were made by men.
    • Of the sexist remarks made against men, 50% were made by men.

The authors wrote, "It is critical to understand how people react to evidence of bias in order to implement successful interventions designed to decrease it, particularly given mounting evidence that non-stigmatized group members (i.e., White men) may respond differently than other individuals."

###

Find out more by reading the full article, "Can Evidence Impact Attitudes? Public Reactions to Evidence of Gender Bias in STEM Fields." For an embargoed copy of the full text, email camille.gamboa@sagepub.com.

Psychology of Women Quarterly (PWQ) is a feminist, scientific, peer-reviewed journal that publishes empirical research, critical reviews and theoretical articles that advance a field of inquiry, brief reports on timely topics, teaching briefs, and invited book reviews related to the psychology of women and gender.
Impact Factor: 1.907
Ranked: 1 out of 39 in Women's Studies and 34 out of 127 in Psychology, Multidisciplinary
Source: 2013 Journal Citation Reports® (Thomson Reuters, 2014)

SAGE is a leading international publisher of journals, books, and electronic media for academic, educational, and professional markets. Since 1965, SAGE has helped inform and educate a global community of scholars, practitioners, researchers, and students spanning a wide range of subject areas including business, humanities, social sciences, and science, technology, and medicine. An independent company, SAGE has principal offices in Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington DC. http://www.sagepublications.com

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.