Comments on: Gender and Biased Perceptions: Scientists Rate Job Applicants

By: On science and objectivity… | Women, Race & Class

On science and objectivity… | Women, Race & Class — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 17:28:58 +0000

[…] Here’s compelling evidence for unconscious gender bias among faculty, specifically in some natural and biological science […]

By: Science, gender, and bias | Gender, Race & Sexuality in Media

Science, gender, and bias | Gender, Race & Sexuality in Media — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 17:28:10 +0000

[…] Here’s compelling evidence for unconscious gender bias among faculty, specifically in some natural and biological science […]

By: GENDER AND BIASED PERCEPTIONS: SCIENTISTS RATE JOB APPLICANTS | Class Blog

GENDER AND BIASED PERCEPTIONS: SCIENTISTS RATE JOB APPLICANTS | Class Blog — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 02:08:34 +0000

[…] GENDER AND BIASED PERCEPTIONS: SCIENTISTS RATE JOB APPLICANTS […]

By: Don’t worry, we’re immune to bias. We’re scientists. | closetpuritan

Sun, 21 Oct 2012 17:23:19 +0000

[…] hear of something like this, it just feels incredible that they could be so ignorant. I guess that most of these studies do not use scientists as subjects, but I don’t think that’s much of an excuse for thinking that scientists have magical […]

By: Umlud

Umlud — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:09:00 +0000

Based on this recent report from England, the case for increased gender equity in physics is likely not going to be resolved in the near future, since less than half of girls actually continue on to take A-levels in physics.

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-girls-left.html

By: Gender bias in rating applicants for science-related jobs « Uphill

Gender bias in rating applicants for science-related jobs « Uphill — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:31:20 +0000

[…] Sociological Images points to a study showing a bias among science professors against hiring female undergraduates for a lab job – even when the person doing the hiring is female. The professors were asked to evaluate mock job applications. The applications were identical, but the gender of the applicant was randomised – half were named “John,” and half, “Jennifer.” As Sociological Images puts it, Just thinking an applicant was female seems to have touched off an unconscious bias that led [the professors] to see female candidates negatively and to be less willing to spend time mentoring them. […]

By: Umlud

Umlud — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:19:00 +0000

Thanks for digging into it; this definition wasn’t mentioned in any of the write-ups that I’d seen. However, if trends within now-fragmented biology departments follow the trend that I’ve seen first-hand, then it’s unlikely that this paper would have covered it.

Your description of the methodology would indicate that a department called “life sciences” or “marine ecology” were not be included, but departments called “cellular biology” would. As a person who comes from the biological sciences – specifically ecology – this seems like a kind of shoddy methodology to me, since the demographics of the local cell biology department is highly divergent from the demographics of the ecology and evolution department. (Again, I recognize that I might be witnessing a skewed effect here.)

To that extent – knowing how they operationalized the term “biology” – I am going to read the paper with a pinch of salt.

By: William Angel

William Angel — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:15:00 +0000

Is it possible that there is still a prejudice against women students, in the sense that they are still perceived as simply putting time into their studies until they are able to find the right mate, at which point they will cease their studies, get married, and start a family? Hence any effort a professor might spend mentoring such a female student is, from a career perspective, time wasted on their part?

By: closetpuritan

closetpuritan — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:17:00 +0000

How so, Anthony? Are there some bio departments where gender bias matters and other where it doesn’t? Which bio departments don’t matter to you?

By: Anthony Tantillo

Anthony Tantillo — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 07:28:00 +0000

So it’s a shit study. Thanks for the heads up.

By: stilladyj

stilladyj — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:01:00 +0000

Agreed

By: anon

anon — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 23:06:00 +0000

This was addressed in the paper. In brief: pretty much any department with the word “biology” in the title was included.

By: pduggie

pduggie — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:23:00 +0000

I’d read the actual resumes at the link and consider if that makes sense. And what possible reason would an award given to a guy be a detriment given to a female? She needed more awards? She is bad for applying for awards?

By: Corey Austin

Corey Austin — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 14:32:00 +0000

”
This study implies that women in the natural and biological sciences (and yes, surely other fields too) still face prejudices that can impact the opportunities they are given to work closely with professors to gain important experiences and skills, as well as limiting their access to jobs and starting them out at a lower salary.”

Does it imply this? I have a few questions..

Perhaps the ‘expectations’ of genders in college are different. Perhaps what are seen as impressive activities or skills range among the genders.. and while keeping the information identical outside of the name seems to keep things constant, perhaps despite the illusion that the information is equal it really isn’t. Perhaps it isn’t gender bias in the sense that it weakens a female, but rather expects different skills and experience based on gender.

I think this study implies that what is good for a male may not be equally good for a female. To suggest that male and female experiences are equal, as in, similar enough to compare in this regard.. seems to assume too many variables that haven’t been tested for.

I find the results interesting, but I think there are many more questions this opens up.. and assuming that the data can be stretched out.. implying meaning seems counterintuitive and an over-generalization.

By: pduggie

pduggie — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 13:50:00 +0000

I wonder, if the 2 resumes had NO possible negative remarks at all if that would hold true as well. Like you take out the thing about taking a bit longer to get serious in college.

If so, it would point in the direction of how gender bias works subtly. You end up giving more weight to negative comments about a woman than a man.

“she’s rather talkative” (oh crap, can’t stand noisy women)

“he’s rather talkative” (oh, well, guess I can put up with that if I have to)