IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v3y2019i11d10.1038_s41562-019-0686-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Committees with implicit biases promote fewer women when they do not believe gender bias exists

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Régner

    (CNRS)

  • Catherine Thinus-Blanc

    (CNRS)

  • Agnès Netter

    (CNRS)

  • Toni Schmader

    (University of British Columbia)

  • Pascal Huguet

    (CNRS)

Abstract

Whether gender bias contributes to women’s under-representation in scientific fields is still controversial. Past research is limited by relying on explicit questionnaire ratings in mock-hiring scenarios, thereby ignoring the potential role of implicit gender bias in the real world. We examine the interactive effect of explicit and implicit gender biases on promotion decisions made by scientific evaluation committees representing the whole scientific spectrum in the course of an annual nationwide competition for elite research positions. Findings reveal that committees with strong implicit gender biases promoted fewer women at year 2 (when committees were not reminded of the study) relative to year 1 (when the study was announced) if those committees did not explicitly believe that external barriers hold women back. When committees believed that women face external barriers, implicit biases did not predict selecting more men over women. This finding highlights the importance of educating evaluative committees about gender biases.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Régner & Catherine Thinus-Blanc & Agnès Netter & Toni Schmader & Pascal Huguet, 2019. "Committees with implicit biases promote fewer women when they do not believe gender bias exists," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(11), pages 1171-1179, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:3:y:2019:i:11:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0686-3
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0686-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0686-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-019-0686-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Merryn McKinnon & Christine O’Connell, 2020. "Perceptions of stereotypes applied to women who publicly communicate their STEM work," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-8, December.
    2. Ramani, Ravi S. & Aguinis, Herman & Coyle-Shapiro, Jacqueline A.M., 2022. "Defining, measuring, and rewarding scholarly impact: mind the level of analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117286, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Kahori Ishibashi & Ryo Takahashi, 2024. "Too“hot”to recognize her rights: The impact of climate change on attitude toward gender equality," Working Papers 2310, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    4. Jaber ABDALLAH & Siham JIBAI, 2020. "Women In Leadership: Gender Personality Traits And Skills," Business Excellence and Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(1), pages 5-15, March.
    5. Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan & Boon Han Koh, 2023. "Discrimination in Evaluation Criteria: The Role of Beliefs versus Outcomes," Discussion Papers 2316, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    6. Fernanda Staniscuaski & Arthur V. Machado & Rossana C. Soletti & Fernanda Reichert & Eugenia Zandonà & Pamela B. Mello-Carpes & Camila Infanger & Zelia M. C. Ludwig & Leticia Oliveira, 2023. "Bias against parents in science hits women harder," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. Hannah B. Love & Alyssa Stephens & Bailey K. Fosdick & Elizabeth Tofany & Ellen R. Fisher, 2022. "The impact of gender diversity on scientific research teams: a need to broaden and accelerate future research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    8. Abramo, Giovanni & Aksnes, Dag W. & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2021. "Gender differences in research performance within and between countries: Italy vs Norway," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    9. Emre Özel, 2024. "What is Gender Bias in Grant Peer review?," Working Papers halshs-03862027, HAL.
    10. Francesca Gioia & Giovanni Immordino, 2023. "Gender-science Implicit Association and Employment Decisions," CSEF Working Papers 681, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    11. José Garcia Montalvo & Daniele Alimonti & Sonja Reiland & Isabelle Vernos, 2020. "Gender stereotype and the scientific career of women: Evidence from biomedical research genters," Economics Working Papers 1750, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    12. Onochie Fan-Osuala, 2023. "Women’s online opinions are still not as influential as those of their male peers in buying decisions," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan & Boon Han Koh, 2021. "Gender Biases in Performance Evaluation: The Role of Beliefs Versus Outcomes," University of East Anglia School of Economics Working Paper Series 2021-09, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    14. José García-Montalvo & Daniele Alimonti & Sonja Reiland & Isabelle Vernos, 2020. "Gender Stereotype and the Scientific Career of Women: Evidence from Biomedical Research Centers," Working Papers 1212, Barcelona School of Economics.
    15. Ryo Takahashi, 2022. "Gender differences in tolerance for women's opinions and the role of social norms," Working Papers 2123, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    16. Anna Lupon & Pablo Rodríguez-Lozano & Mireia Bartrons & Alba Anadon-Rosell & Meritxell Batalla & Susana Bernal & Andrea G Bravo & Pol Capdevila & Miguel Cañedo-Argüelles & Núria Catalán & Ana Genua-Ol, 2021. "Towards women-inclusive ecology: Representation, behavior, and perception of women at an international conference," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Zhiyuan Liu & Menglu Shentu & Yuhan Xue & Yike Yin & Zhihao Wang & Liangchen Tang & Yu Zhang & Weiqi Zheng, 2023. "Sport–gender stereotypes and their impact on impression evaluations," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:3:y:2019:i:11:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0686-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.