Work

A re-evaluation of gender bias in receptiveness to scientific evidence of gender bias

Year: 2024

Type: article

Abstract: Gender bias has been documented in many aspects of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) careers, yet efforts to identify the underlying causes have been inconclusive. To what extent do cognitive biases, including unequal receptiveness in women and men to evidence of gender bias, contribute to gender bias in STEM? We investigated receptiveness in a STEM context among members of the general public, by undertaking a high-powered (total N = 1171) replication, including three experiments (2 pre-registered) of the prominent study by Handley et al . [22]. It was hypothesized that men would evaluate a research summary reporting evidence of gender bias less favourably than women but that there would be no difference between men and women’s evaluations of research summaries unrelated to gender bias. The results revealed no effect of the assessor’s gender on receptiveness to scientific evidence of gender bias. The different results compared to those of Handley et al . [22] suggest either that the gender bias they detected has diminished in the past decade or that their findings are a false positive. The present research adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that some influential studies on cognitive ‘markers’ of gender bias warrant re-examination.

Source: Royal Society Open Science

DOI: 10.1098/rsos.240419

Authors: David R. Shanks, Hollie A. Coles, Nadia Yeo

Institution: University College London

Language: English

Topic: Career Development and Diversity

Subfield: Safety Research

Field: Social Sciences

Domain: Social Sciences

SDGs: Reduced inequalities, Gender equality

Open Access status: gold

Estimated APC paid: $1,471