U.S. Women Faculty in the Social Sciences Also Face Gender Inequalities.

There is a national interest in United States women's underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); however, gender inequality in the social sciences has not received similar attention. Although women increasingly earn postgraduate degrees in the social sciences, women faculty still experience gender inequities. Consistent gender inequities include slower career advancement, blunted salaries, unequal workloads, work-life conflict, systemic gender biases, underrepresentation in positions of power, and hostile work environments. Cultural biases suggest that once women have achieved parity, gender bias no longer exists. This review challenges that notion by providing evidence from social science domains in which women are well-represented but continue to face systemic gender biases. We examine cultural influences on gender representation and career advancement in psychology, economics, political science, sociology, and anthropology. We make interdisciplinary comparisons of career trajectories and salaries using national data, documenting patterns across the social sciences. For example, women economists face gendered standards in publishing, and women political scientists are less likely to have their work cited than men. Furthermore, data show that salaries become stagnant as the representation of women in these fields increases. These disparities reflect cultural biases in perceptions of women's competence stemming from social role theory. We discuss best practices to address these problems, focusing on the ADVANCE organizational change programs funded by the National Science Foundation that target (a) improving academic climate, (b) providing professional development, and (c) fostering social networking. Federally supported interventions can reveal systemic gender biases in academia and reduce gender disparities for women academics in the social sciences.

Gender inequality in academia: Problems and solutions for women faculty in STEM.

Recently there is widespread interest in women's underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); however, progress toward gender equality in these fields is slow. More alarmingly, these gender disparities worsen when examining women's representation within STEM departments in academia. While the number of women receiving postgraduate degrees has increased in recent years, the number of women in STEM faculty positions remains largely unchanged. One explanation for this lack of progress toward gender parity is negative and pervasive gender stereotypes, which may facilitate hiring discrimination and reduce opportunities for women's career advancement. Women in STEM also have lower social capital (e.g., support networks), limiting women's opportunities to earn tenure and learn about grant funding mechanisms. Women faculty in STEM may also perceive their academic climate as unwelcoming and threatening, and report hostility and uncomfortable tensions in their work environments, such as sexual harassment and discrimination. Merely the presence of gender-biased cues in physical spaces targeted toward men (e.g., "geeky" décor) can foster a sense of not belonging in STEM. We describe the following three factors that likely contribute to gender inequalities and women's departure from academic STEM fields: (a) numeric underrepresentation and stereotypes, (b) lack of supportive social networks, and (c) chilly academic climates. We discuss potential solutions for these problems, focusing on National Science Foundation-funded ADVANCE organizational change interventions that target (a) recruiting diverse applicants (e.g., training search committees), (b) mentoring, networking, and professional development (e.g., promoting women faculty networks); and (c) improving academic climate (e.g., educating male faculty on gender bias).

Cardiovascular and Self-Regulatory Consequences of SES-Based Social Identity Threat.

This work examined the effects of socioeconomic status (SES)-based social identity threat on cardiovascular indexes of challenge and threat and self-regulatory strength. Participants ( N = 104) took an exam described as either diagnostic of intellectual ability (identity threat) or framed as a problem-solving task (control) while we recorded cardiovascular reactivity and assessed participants' physical self-control. Under identity threat, lower SES students exhibited impaired performance, reduced self-control, and cardiovascular threat reactivity. In contrast, higher SES students under threat exhibited the reverse pattern-a boost in performance, no change in self-regulation, and cardiovascular challenge reactivity. Furthermore, while measures of general arousal (heart rate and pre-ejection period) were unrelated to performance, cardiovascular patterns of challenge and threat were significantly associated with performance under identity threat. Results provide evidence that SES-based stigma influences physiological and self-regulatory processes.

Discrimination and the stress response: psychological and physiological consequences of anticipating prejudice in interethnic interactions.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to demonstrate that individuals who anticipate interacting with a prejudiced cross-race/ethnicity partner show an exacerbated stress response, as measured through both self-report and hemodynamic and vascular responses, compared with individuals anticipating interacting with a nonprejudiced cross-race/ethnicity partner. METHODS: Through a questionnaire exchange with a White interaction partner (a confederate) Latina participants learned that their partner had racial/ethnic biased or egalitarian attitudes. Latina participants reported their cognitive and emotional states, and cardiovascular responses were measured while participants prepared and delivered a speech to the White confederate. RESULTS: Participants who believed that their interaction partner held prejudiced attitudes reported greater concern and more threat emotions before the interaction, and more stress after the interaction, and showed greater cardiovascular response than did participants who believed that their partner had egalitarian attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that merely anticipating prejudice leads to both psychological and cardiovascular stress responses. These results are consistent with the conceptualization of anticipated discrimination as a stressor and suggest that vigilance for prejudice may be a contributing factor to racial/ethnic health disparities in the United States.