Subconscious Discrimination in Hiring Practices
High school education and societal expectations are both contributing factors to the contuining under-representation of females in physics. But what about discrimination and the role that it plays, if any, in this trend?
Well, a study conducted by Corinne Moss-Racusin and her Yale collegues showed that seemingly unconscious hiring practices may play a significant role. In this study, 127 tenured scientists (chemists, biologists, and physicists) from six different universities were asked to provide feedback on a job application for a graduate student lab post at another school. When being informed of the purpose, they were told that their comments would aid the applicant in question further develop their career. The applications were identical in every respect save one; half of the participants were told that the applicant's name was John, while the others were told that the applicant's name was Jennifer. You can look at excerpts from the application here.
Well, a study conducted by Corinne Moss-Racusin and her Yale collegues showed that seemingly unconscious hiring practices may play a significant role. In this study, 127 tenured scientists (chemists, biologists, and physicists) from six different universities were asked to provide feedback on a job application for a graduate student lab post at another school. When being informed of the purpose, they were told that their comments would aid the applicant in question further develop their career. The applications were identical in every respect save one; half of the participants were told that the applicant's name was John, while the others were told that the applicant's name was Jennifer. You can look at excerpts from the application here.
The results were disheartening, but somewhat predictable. In the case of the male applicant, scientists were much more likely to rate him as more competent and hirable than the identical Jennifer. Because of this, they were more likely to offer this applicant career mentoring- an important part of a scientist's professional development.
In addition, the scientists stated that potential employers would offer John a higher starting salary than Jennifer- about $4,000 more per year on average. The female scientists in the study presented this bias as well, it wasn't limited to the male participants. The results were also independent of other possible influencing factors, such as age or seniority. To Moss-Racusin, the fact that this bias can present itself in " very well meaning, very well trained scientists who emphasize objectivity and egalitarianism in their daily lives" shows that the prejudice is a wholly subconscious one that is fueled by societal norms and perceptions. Sad as it may be, men appear to be seen as better scientists. The authors of this study point out a significant aspect of this study; all the participants are in a field where they must make these decisions everyday. Therefore, these findings are most likely indicative of a widespread societal bias. Another highly interesting fact is that when asked to rate the candidate's likability, Jennifer received a higher score than John. So the prejudice against her wasn't based on dislike, it was probably truly subconscious. As Moss-Racusin states, "… despite expressing warmth toward emerging female scientists, faculty members of both genders appear to be affected by enduring cultural stereotypes about women’s lack of science competence that translate into biases in student evaluation and mentoring." To help encourage women in the field of physics, Moss-Racusin believes that effective mentors are essential; she suggests that universities establish guidelines in order to better support their students, regardless of gender. |