An overwhelmed woman in gray scrubs resting on a gray couch. Image by Cedric Fauntleroy under Pexels license.

In the United States, women on average earn less than men in their lifetimes (the gender pay gap). One of the various explanations for this pay gap is that women tend to do tasks that involve nurturing or helping others, and these tasks often don’t lead to promotions (or higher pay). Scholars argue that such labor is integral to organizations even though it doesn’t lead to promotions and is undervalued. But do such patterns hold in the medical field? 

To see if women doctors do more of the unrewarded but crucial work of nurturing others, Laura Nelson and her colleagues used data from an app used by doctors to evaluate students in residency (medical school). Their study examined 33,456 evaluations of 359 resident physicians by 285 attending physicians across eight U.S. hospitals. Within the app, doctors were required by their employers to at least leave a numerical rating of the students’ performance, however, reviewers could go beyond what was required and leave comments for the student. The researchers were specifically interested in this comment option and wanted to see if women were more likely to make comments to students within the app.

They found that women doctors do more work that involves helping or nurturing medical students than men.women doctors do more work that involves helping or nurturing medical students than men. Women provided more written feedback to medical students in residency, whereas men were over twice as likely to give only numerical evaluations, without adding written feedback. Furthermore, comments written by women often provided targeted and specific feedback, including reassurance to residents who made mistakes. 

This research confirms that one of the causes of the gender pay gap is that women do tasks, such as going above and beyond in training medical students, that don’t lead to them getting promoted. This research also encourages people to not just think about time spent at work but also think about who is doing more caring and nurturing tasks at work.

A group of people building a sidewalk with wet concrete. Image by Rodolfo Quirós under Pexels license.

A new study by Netta Kahana highlighted the shifting public opinions about combining travel with volunteering activities–practices, known widely as volunteer tourism or sometimes “voluntourism”. This practice typically emphasizes community work in developing countries and in recent years has come under scrutiny for being self-serving, exploitative, ineffective, and even harmful. Such concerns result from the fact volunteers can be unskilled and that the infrastructure these volunteers build is typically not self-sustainable without ongoing supplies or labor. Despite these critiques, volunteer tourism remains popular for ambitious and affluent young people and Kahana wanted to understand why. 

The study gauged 48 volunteer tourists from Israel and their self-perception, self-worth, and motivations.48 volunteer tourists from Israel and their self-perception, self-worth, and motivations. The interviewees were all in their twenties, from middle-class backgrounds, and had volunteered in either Nepal or India. Many of the study participants acknowledged recent public criticisms of voluntourism. However, they also saw volunteerism aligned with travel as a morally worthy action, serving the common good.

Kahana’s analysis documented three main justifications for these sentiments. The first involved the selection of a “proper” or reputable organization. As one volunteer explained:

• “You need to carefully check what their mission statements are because when you are in a hostel and they offer you to volunteer in an orphanage, it is for money. It totally hurts the children, so inquire, inquire, inquire, inquire, and investigate. You do not volunteer without talking with an alumnus. Like I did.”

The second justification had to do with providing locals with beneficial tools. Another volunteer put it like this:

• “The issue was about making them [the locals] understand they have more options to make money through tourism, and they can rebuild themselves financially. Because it’s very difficult there. It’s crazy poverty.”

The third justification volunteers offered was about being socially proactive:

• “I don’t say it [volunteering] is the best but if you come with good intentions and you want to help [then] come and do your best…. If you will do good, then it is great. If I look on the positive vs. the negative, then it is more positive. Hence, I volunteered. It is not a zero-sum game or 50-50, it is more 80-20.”

In other words, volunteers believe their good works contribute to net-positive outcomes.

positive self-evaluations of volunteer tourists’ characters and are used to dispel perceived judgments from society These interviews reveal the positive self-evaluations of volunteer tourists’ characters and are used to dispel any perceived judgements from society that might be raised about their participation. Kahana hopes her article will inform guidelines to ensure that the good intentions of volunteers will materialize as this sector of tourism continues to develop and grow.

A hospital room with three empty beds. Image by Pixabay under Pexels license.

People who cough or sneeze in public may receive disgusted glares. Addiction recovery programs are often anonymous. And many types of patients face isolation, negative stereotypes, and even verbal or physical abuse. All of these are examples of disease stigma, the negative meanings or stereotypes that we associate with a disease. Such stigmatization can lead to discrimination against people with health conditions. It can also cause people with health conditions to “self-stigmatize,” internalizing negative beliefs about themselves and their disease. Understanding how these processes work can help us create more effective ways to reduce stigma and its impact.

A recent study by Rachel Kahn Best and Alina Areseniev-Koehler aimed to understand why some diseases are more stigmatized by analyzing how different diseases were discussed in American media from 1980 to 2018. why some diseases are more stigmatized by analyzing how different diseases were discussed in American media from 1980 to 2018. Media can reveal stereotypes that are widely recognized and publicly discussed. Even when individuals do not believe these stereotypes, they are likely aware of them and may be influenced by them. Best and Areseniev-Koehler used word embedding (a computational text analysis method) to examine 4.7 million newspaper articles and transcripts from TV and radio programs. The study considered 106 different diseases, including behavioral health conditions (addictions, eating disorders, and mental illnesses), infectious diseases (sexually transmitted infections, influenza, hepatitis, malaria, etc.), and chronic conditions (cancers, autoimmune diseases, genetic diseases, hypertension, etc.).

Previous research on disease stigma suggests that there are two main drivers of stigma: contagion avoidance and norm enforcement. Contagion avoidance happens when people, in an effort to stay healthy, avoid other people who look sick. Norm enforcement happens when a disease becomes associated with a personality trait or behavior that society views as deviant or as a violation of social norms. For example, some may view addictions as a sign of weakness and sexually transmitted infections as a sign of promiscuity. Over time, however, advocacy efforts can help to reduce both types of stigma. 

Testing out these theories, Best and Areseniev-Koehler find that behavioral health conditions generate the most judgmental language in the media, connected to discussions of immorality and negative personality traits.behavioral health conditions generate the most judgmental language in the media, connected to discussions of immorality and negative personality traits. Among the infectious diseases, sexually transmitted infections generated the most judgment. Overall, infectious diseases were connected to meanings of disgust. These results support the idea that norm enforcement and contagion avoidance drive stigma. Best and Areseniev-Koehler also found that overall disease stigma has declined over time, but only for chronic physical illnesses. Stigma remains high for behavioral conditions and infectious diseases. 

Best and Areseniev-Koehler observed a somewhat lower stigma for diseases connected to stronger advocacy efforts. However, further research is needed to determine whether such advocacy causes a decrease in stigma. 

A group of young adults working at a coffee shop patio. Image by Helena Lopes under Pexels license.

The notion of a pan-ethnic Asian American identity first emerged in the United States during the civil rights movement but has become increasingly tied into a monolithic narrative that lumps Asian ethnic groups together. Lost in this process is the diversity of history, culture, languages, and political views different Asian American ethnic groups have. New research by sociologists looking at survey data examines the differences between ethnic groups in their views towards affirmative action and how, depending on their understanding of the Supreme Court’s views toward affirmative action, their responses may change. 

Ji-won Lee and W. Carson Byrd conducted an experiment using data from the 2016 National Asian American Survey, a national survey of over 3,600 Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Filipino, Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Hmong people throughout the US about their views on race-conscious college admissions. 

Around half of the participants gave their views on race-conscious college admissions; the rest received information about the 2016 SCOTUS ruling before they provided their opinions. The “split ballot” design was intended to assess the effect knowledge of the Supreme Court upholding affirmative action in Fisher v. University of Texas had on Asian Americans’ views towards affirmative action, and this brought out some important ethnic variations.

Lee and Byrd found that for the group without information about the SCOTUS ruling, attitudes towards race-conscious admissions varied widely depending on ethnicity. Over 50% of Koreans, Bangladeshis, Filipinos, and Cambodians were in favor or strongly in favor of race-conscious admissionsOver 50% of Koreans, Bangladeshis, Filipinos, and Cambodians were in favor or strongly in favor of race-conscious admissions followed closely by Japanese, Indian, and Pakistani respondents. Chinese, Vietnamese, and Hmong respondents were the least likely to be in favor of affirmative action and more likely to be opposed to it. In this sample, Asian Americans focused mostly on how they would benefit from affirmative action and the discrimination they face.  

In the sample where participants did have prior knowledge of the SCOTUS ruling, the researchers found that support for race-conscious admissions attitudes decreased. When they had prior knowledge of SCOTUS-affirming race-conscious admissions, Asian Americans’ attitudes centered around their ethnoracial identities and political support for immigrants, a group identity Asian Americans are more likely to take on. The framing of the SCOTUS rulings thus demonstrates the complex relationships between Asian Americans and other racial groups. Asian Americans who embrace the idea that their interests align closer with white people end up supporting or even opposing affirmative action by considering if they could be victims of such admissions policies. 

The author’s findings demonstrate the diversity in Asian American ethnic groups’ views towards affirmative action as well as the differences in how their views shift within the context of Asian American racialization in relation to other racial groups and the US legal system. Although there is a wide-held perception of Asian Americans being the same, different ethnic groups have different histories and experiences of their race and ethnicity within the US and its higher education system. By looking deeper into different groups, Lee and Byrd show how we see that different ethnic groups have different attitudes toward affirmative action. However, these findings can extend beyond affirmative action to dismantle the assumption that Asian Americans all hold the same interests, values, and cultures.

A patient signing a form in a doctor’s office. Image by SHVETS production under Pexels license.

Reproductive rights are considered a hot-button topic by many, but different groups can face different pressures in exercising these rights. Moreover, rights around fertility-affecting operations like the removal of one’s uterus (hysterectomies), are often left out of the discussion. To shed light on these issues, recent research examines how gender and race affect those seeking a hysterectomy, usually seen as the most extreme birth control option. 

Andréa Becker, a postdoctoral researcher and instructor at the University of California San Francisco conducted 100 in-depth interviews with a diverse set of individuals who have undergone or are considering a hysterectomy. These operations were sought in many cases to remedy painful reproductive conditions like endometriosis, uterine tumors, or for gender-affirming care. 

She discovered that while white cisgender (cis) women are routinely blocked from accessing desired hysterectomies, cis women of color are pressured into having hysterectomies by medical professionals they are relying on for responsive treatment. Even in cases where a woman of color desires to preserve her fertility, she may experience unwanted pressure to have her uterus removed instead of seeking other treatments for painful reproductive conditions. For example, here’s how a Black woman named Kat described her struggle to preserve her fertility despite the medical establishment’s pressure.

“Every time I had a physical exam, every time I had a vaginal exam, every time I had a pelvic exam every time, it was like “hysterectomy, hysterectomy, hysterectomy,” it was it was definitely pushed.”

Women who did not have or intend to have a male partner or desire kids also experienced differential treatment when seeking a hysterectomy. One lesbian woman even described how medical practitioners did not consider her wishes on the matter at all and were more concerned with the fertility wishes of a fictitious future husband.

Perhaps surprisingly, trans men and non-binary patients reported having a comparatively easy experience getting a premenopausal hysterectomy if they wanted one and were readily offered the procedure or even directed to it as it reinforced societal gender norms.

The study clearly shows a systematic disregard for women’s agency by the medical community, especially that of women of color. The pressure exerted by practitioners to sterilize women of color, even when it contradicts their wishes and goals, has links to a much longer history of medical abuse of such patients. These findings reinforce the need for medical institutions and practitioners to understand and address how racial prejudice and other forms of discrimination affect their treatment of patients.

A bare prison cell with a bunk bed, metal chair, and toilet. Image from RDNE Stock project under Pexels license.

Gender segregation is a core feature of American prisons, with men and women separated out into separate facilities. So how do gender nonconforming prisoners fit into this system? 

In a study of California men’s prisons from 1941 to 2018, Joss Greene finds that the response to gender-nonconforming prisoners varied historically. As attitudes towards both punishment and gender changed over time, prison administrators shifted their approach to managing gender-nonconforming prisoners. 

1941-1954: Segregation

Beginning in the early 1940s, California promoted prisons as sites of rehabilitation. However, from 1941 to 1954, prison administrators viewed gender nonconformity as a contagion that threatened both the overall health of the prison and the prison’s rehabilitation efforts. Prisoners who were identified as “effeminate homosexuals” were segregated from the rest of the prison population, stigmatized, and excluded from educational and work opportunities.

1955-1981: Treatment

From 1955 to 1981, prison administrators approached gender-nonconforming prisoners as “medicalized subjects”, meaning that their homosexuality or gender expression was considered a psychiatric or medical condition. 

Gender-nonconforming prisoners were subjected to psychological studies and “treatment” (in the form of harsh medical experimentation) at a newly constructed California prison medical facility. However, many prisoners were able to use their new medical label as leverage to demand access to some gender-affirming care.

1982-1998: Risk Management

In the late 1970s, California’s “tough on crime” approach led to a historic rise in prison populations. To increase efficiency, prison administrators classified prisoners into four risk levels, based on their sentence, behavioral record, and other factors. Those classified as high-risk were subject to harsher punishment. Under this system, all “known homosexuals” were automatically classified as a Level 3 risk (the second-highest level). They were grouped in with individuals convicted of more serious crimes, faced increased restrictions within the prison, and were frequently targets of violence. Victims of violence often increased their risk score by defending themselves, as the system did not distinguish between the risk of harm to the prisoner and the risk of the prisoner harming others.

1999-2018: Legal Status

Finally, from 1999-2018, there were growing social movements opposing mass incarceration, and “transgender” became a recognized legal status. Prison administrators, seeking to avoid legal battles, created a “transgender” prisoner category and expanded their medical services, including gender-affirming hormone treatments.

Despite these legal advances, most transgender prisoners have been unable to access hormone treatments and still face widespread suffering in prisons. They remain a protected group in name, but not in reality.

Advancing Rights

Greene’s work highlights how institutions (and their underlying logic and resources) can shape how gender boundaries are defined, reproduced, and changed over time. In California prisons, views on crime and punishment, incarceration rates, prison resources, and anti-incarceration social movements all shifted gender boundaries within prisons. These historical shifts should provide hope for some trans rights advocates, who view changing prison policies as an opportunity to provide relief for transgender prisoners. That said, fully addressing the suffering of gender-nonconforming prisoners will require more fundamental changes to both societal gender boundaries and the nature of prisons themselves.

A woman wearing a hard hat and safety glasses working on an engine. Image from Chevanon Photography under Pexels license.

Unionizing and strikes continue to maintain headlines, but labor unions and strikes have been intertwined with American industry for decades. That said, many of these historic strikes have been by unions representing traditionally male-dominated positions, whereas today women are increasingly taking on unionizing challenges. This changing gender balance was recently highlighted by Margarita Torre in her recent study.

Torre analyzed the General Social Survey data from 2002-2021 and found that supportive attitudes around labor unions have increased across the board. Younger women, women with less than a high school education level, and those in female-dominated occupations were even more favorable towards unions compared to other groups of women. 

There are good reasons for this. Historically, as Torre writes, women have “tended to work in a much narrower range of occupations than men and are overrepresented in low-paying, part-time, and temporary jobs with fewer opportunities for advancement.” Unions provide greater benefits (healthcare or retirement plans) and higher wages which can help reduce gender inequality in the workforce, especially in labor markets that offer a wider range of job opportunities and hours compared to previous decades. 

Race is also a big part of the story. About 11% of Black women in the U.S. are part of unions, higher than both White and Hispanic women.11% of Black women in the U.S. are part of unions, higher than both White and Hispanic women. Women and people of color stand to benefit greatly from joining a union as particularly vulnerable groups. 

While only about 4% of 24-year-olds and younger express their intention of joining a union when entering the workforce, Torre explains that the favorability of unions among young women may increase as more women enter the workforce and begin to see the benefits of unionization.

A dark silhouette of a man reading a book in a library. Image from Pixabay under Pexels license.

Self-help books have continued to gain popularity in recent decades, but there is mixed evidence of how these books are helpful for people, especially for those experiencing mental health challenges. To gain a better understanding of how individuals use these books, A.E. Gwynne did intensive interviews with people experiencing depression who regularly read such literature.

When asked why they turned to self-help books in the first place, interviewees typically described wanting a “quick fix” or “silver bullet”. Sarah is an example. She believed reading a self-help book on mental health would, “be like going to one of those churches where they put their hands on your head, and all of a sudden…a miracle!” 

Many interviewees described changing their expectations of these books as they read more. In particular, they described the quest for books that could teach them only one thing that could potentially aid them in their lives. They also realized that the books were only an aid and they needed to do the work of helping themselves.They also realized that the books were only an aid and they needed to do the work of helping themselves. Aaron explained, “That’s what self-help means. It means help yourself. The book’s helping you, but you’re still doing the lifting.” Beyond personal improvement, respondents also valued how self-help books allowed them to understand that others are experiencing the same struggles as they were. 

While readers were generally enthusiastic about self-help books, some admitted that reading them sometimes caused them to experience shame, disappointment, fear, confusion, and anger. This less-than-positive effect was generally attributed to the fact that reading was sometimes hindered by the very symptoms they were experiencing. Monique explained, “When you’re depressed you don’t really feel like reading. I think coming out of it, that’s when you read.”

While self-help books can be helpful for some, this research highlights how reading them is often a mixed bag and rarely an instant fix. People seeking help strictly from self-help books may isolate themselves and prevent them from connecting with organizations, programs, and professionals with expertise in dealing with addressing the root issues of mental health.

Head football coach Leslie Frazier of the Minnesota Vikings from 2010-2013. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

Racial disparities in hiring practices remain a constant issue in many workplaces. What’s more, these racialized biases are also influencing nonwhite employees’ likelihood of being promoted to leadership positions. This happens even in the National Football League, which has made a point of trying to facilitate the hiring of Black head coaches through the implementation of its famous “Rooney Rule.”

In 2003, the NFL adopted one of the most recognized diversity policies in the U.S., the Rooney Rule. Named after Dan Rooney, former owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers, the Rooney Rule requires that at least one person of color be interviewed for all open head coaching positions in the league. Ironically, Pittsburgh is one of the only places where the rule seems to have worked. Before the 2022 Super Bowl, two of the three Black NFL head coaches were fired, only leaving Mike Tomlin, the head coach of the Steelers since 2007. Although Tomlin is only one season short of being the NFL’s longest-tenured Black head coach, racial disparities in the NFL’s hiring practices still exist. 

In their article “Racial Disparity in Leadership: Evidence of Valuative Bias in the Promotions of National Football League Coaches”, Christopher I. Rider and colleagues explore how racial disparities in leadership roles persist despite this policy. They provide an NFL context by using career history data for over 1,300 coaching staff of the NFL between 1985 and 2015 to investigate how, even when employees of color and white employees hold the same lower-ranked position and perform at equal rates, employees of color are less likely to progress toward a leadership role than their white counterparts (also known as valuative bias). They then analyze if the Rooney Rule was effective at reducing valuative bias in promoting lower-level coaches of color to leadership roles. 

It remains puzzling that the NFL is made up of primarily Black football players yet white men hold the majority of leadership roles. This reason alone provides the researchers with an informative context for exploring racial disparities in leadership attainment. Additionally, it is easy to measure a coach’s performance by simply looking at the percentage of a team’s wins and the performance of the offense/defense that corresponds with the coach’s primary responsibility. Finally, as demonstrated in the chart below, the NFL coaching staff is great for analyzing promotions to leadership roles because there is a clear ranking among coaching positions.

The researchers found that between 1985 and 2015, the Rooney Rule did increase the representation of head coaches of color right after it was implemented. However, when they include all variations of promotions across all coaching positions, they find a significant difference in the average promotion rate for coaches of color (4.5%) and white coaches (7.6%). They also find that when the lowest-level coaches are restricted (assistant position coaches), white coaches are 2.4 times more likely than coaches of color to be promoted. Although they find that white coaches are no more likely to be promoted to head coach than coaches of color in the same position, they find that nearly 80% of promotions to head coach are from coordinator positions. This means that even when a coach of color and a white coach played the same position in college, began their coaching career at the same level, and are currently coaching the same position, white coaches are nearly twice as likely to be promoted to coordinator positions than coaches of color, suggesting that Black coaches who are initially hired into lower-level coaching positions have a much lower chance in career advancement opportunities than their white counterparts.

Although the Rooney Rule increased the representation of coaches of color in all NFL coaching positions, racial disparities in career advancement opportunities across all levels persist in the NFL–especially in lower-level positions, where they are not subject to the Rooney Rule. In other words, valuative bias in promoting coaches of color persists despite the NFL’s high-profile attempt to close the racial gap in leadership positions. By using NFL hiring practices as a case study, the researchers show that organizations must address unequal promoting practices from lower-level positions to close racial disparities in leadership positions.

A music studio mixing board. Image by Lukas from Pexels is licensed under Pexels license.

Collaboration is the key to spurring creativity…or is it? Research suggests that women are often undervalued on creative project teams, receiving harsher evaluations and fewer opportunities to participate. However, as new technologies allow for asynchronous work (with team members working independently at different times, and in different spaces), the structure of creative teams is changing.  

Aruna Ranganathana and Aayan Dasa studied how asynchronous teamwork affects performance for Baul sangeet folk-music ensembles in eastern India. Most ensembles have several instrumentalists – who are typically men – and a single singer. The ensembles collaborate to decide what music to play and how to shape each song musically. Because each ensemble member plays a unique part, the music can be recorded either synchronously (with all ensemble members performing live together) or asynchronously (with each musician recording their part independently). The researchers interviewed musicians and observed recording sessions. They also conducted an experiment in which Baul singers recorded the same song both synchronously and asynchronously. Their performance was then assessed by musical experts on singer performance, vocal tone, vocal range, and overall group cohesion. 

From the interviews and observations, the researchers found that men and women experienced the synchronous recording environment differently. The men enjoyed the synchronous recording and thought that the group brought out their best creative work. They enjoyed creative discussions with other musicians, valued the feedback they received, and felt motivated. “People were encouraging me throughout, which further boosted my confidence; it felt like they were guiding me. I also got respect from all the people here. I also had a great experience interacting with the music producers; they were all very good,” a male musician described. 

Although some women also preferred synchronous recording and felt they performed best in a group environment, others preferred recording asynchronously. These women described receiving unnecessarily critical feedback or a lack of support and respect from the male musicians in synchronous recordingreceiving unnecessarily critical feedback or a lack of support and respect from the male musicians in synchronous recording. Some said they couldn’t express creative ideas or concerns. 

“The person who was playing the flute was trying to establish himself as a big shot and was constantly boasting about himself,” said one female singer. “He was trying to hint that I was not singing properly at certain points. . . . When I pointed out his mistake, and he was offended by it, no one else supported me even though they knew what I was saying was correct…I felt really bad today.”

Working asynchronously, in contrast, many women felt that their performance improved and that they could express themselves better. One woman described: “Whatever I had within me related to that song, I was able to provide all of it.” 

The experimental study appeared to bear this out, as the asynchronous environment improved ratings of women’s performance by nearly 30% the asynchronous environment improved ratings of women’s performance by nearly 30%. Even the women who preferred working synchronously received better performance ratings in an asynchronous environment.

While we don’t know whether asynchronous options have similar effects for other types of work, this study suggests that changes to the structure of work in creative teams can reduce gender disparities in performance and allow women to fully realize their creative potential.