IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gender Stereotype and the Scientific Career of Women: Evidence from Biomedical Research Centers


  • José García-Montalvo
  • Daniele Alimonti
  • Sonja Reiland
  • Isabelle Vernos


Women are underrepresented in the top ranks of the scientific career, including the biomedical disciplines. This is not generally the result of explicit and easily recognizable gender biases but the outcome of decisions with many components of unconscious nature that are difficult to assess. Evidence suggests that implicit gender stereotypes influence perceptions as well as decisions. To explore these potential reasons of women's underrepresentation in life sciences we analyzed the outcome of gender-science and gender-career Implicit Association Tests (IAT) taken by 2,589 scientists working in high profile biomedical research centers. We found that male-science association is less pronounced among researchers than in the general population (34% below the level of the general population). However, this difference is mostly explained by the low level of the IAT score among female researchers. Despite the highly meritocratic view of the academic career, male scientists have a high level of male-science association (261% the level among women scientists), similar to the general population.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:1212

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Christine Wennerås & Agnes Wold, 1997. "Nepotism and sexism in peer-review," Nature, Nature, vol. 387(6631), pages 341-343, May.
    2. Vincent Larivière & Chaoqun Ni & Yves Gingras & Blaise Cronin & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2013. "Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science," Nature, Nature, vol. 504(7479), pages 211-213, December.
    3. Lerchenmueller, Marc J. & Sorenson, Olav, 2018. "The gender gap in early career transitions in the life sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1007-1017.
    4. Helen Shen, 2013. "Inequality quantified: Mind the gender gap," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7439), pages 22-24, March.
    5. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. Emre Özel, 2024. "What is Gender Bias in Grant Peer review?," Working Papers halshs-03862027, HAL.
    3. Aleksandra Cislak & Magdalena Formanowicz & Tamar Saguy, 2018. "Bias against research on gender bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 189-200, April.
    4. Nikola Komlenac & Lisa Stockinger & Margarethe Hochleitner, 2022. "Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors Moderate Associations between Work Stress and Exhaustion: Testing the Job Demands–Resources Model in Academic Staff at an Austrian Medical University," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Hajibabaei, Anahita & Schiffauerova, Andrea & Ebadi, Ashkan, 2022. "Gender-specific patterns in the artificial intelligence scientific ecosystem," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    6. Martha M Bakker & Maarten H Jacobs, 2016. "Tenure Track Policy Increases Representation of Women in Senior Academic Positions, but Is Insufficient to Achieve Gender Balance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, September.
    7. Natalia Restrepo & Alfonso Unceta & Xabier Barandiaran, 2021. "Gender Diversity in Research and Innovation Projects: The Proportion of Women in the Context of Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, May.
    8. Fengyuan Liu & Petter Holme & Matteo Chiesa & Bedoor AlShebli & Talal Rahwan, 2023. "Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 353-364, March.
    9. Lutter, Mark & Habicht, Isabel M. & Schröder, Martin, 2022. "Gender differences in the determinants of becoming a professor in Germany. An event history analysis of academic psychologists from 1980 to 2019," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    10. Kim, Lanu & Smith, Daniel Scott & Hofstra, Bas & McFarland, Daniel A., 2022. "Gendered knowledge in fields and academic careers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    11. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Finardi, Ugo, 2021. "The funding-productivity-gender nexus in science, a multistage analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    12. Letki, Natalia & Biały, Grzegorz & Sankowski, Piotr & Walentek, Dawid, 2022. "Streamlining for excellence discriminates against women: A study of research productivity of 2.7 mln scientists in 45 countries," OSF Preprints yr8me, Center for Open Science.
    13. Jamal El-Ouahi & Vincent Larivière, 2023. "On the lack of women researchers in the Middle East and North Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4321-4348, August.
    14. Mancuso, Raffaele & Rossi-Lamastra, Cristina & Franzoni, Chiara, 2023. "Topic choice, gendered language, and the under-funding of female scholars in mission-oriented research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    15. Tahereh Dehdarirad & Anna Villarroya & Maite Barrios, 2015. "Research on women in science and higher education: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 795-812, June.
    16. Ann Brower & Alex James, 2023. "Sticky Floors, Double-Binds, and Double Whammies: Adjusting for Research Performance Reveals Universities’ Gender Pay Gap is Not Disappearing," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, August.
    17. Charissa Samaniego & Peggy Lindner & Maryam A. Kazmi & Bobbie A. Dirr & Dejun Tony Kong & Evonzia Jeff-Eke & Christiane Spitzmueller, 2023. "Higher research productivity = more pay? Gender pay-for-productivity inequity across disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1395-1407, February.
    18. Stefano Bianchini & Patrick Llerena & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Emre Özel, 2022. "Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    19. Matthias Kuppler, 2022. "Predicting the future impact of Computer Science researchers: Is there a gender bias?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6695-6732, November.
    20. Yongchao Ma & Ying Teng & Zhongzhun Deng & Li Liu & Yi Zhang, 2023. "Does writing style affect gender differences in the research performance of articles?: An empirical study of BERT-based textual sentiment analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2105-2143, April.

    More about this item


    gender bias; implicit association test; research centers; scientific career;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J44 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Professional Labor Markets and Occupations
    • J7 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:bge:wpaper:1212. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Bruno Guallar (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.