IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v10y2023i1d10.1057_s41599-023-02508-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

All employees benefit: arguments that help increase support for affirmative action in academic careers

Author

Listed:
  • Nikola Komlenac

    (Medical University of Innsbruck)

  • Liora Neugebauer

    (Medical University of Innsbruck)

  • Jennifer Birke

    (Medical University of Innsbruck)

  • Margarethe Hochleitner

    (Medical University of Innsbruck)

Abstract

The goal of affirmative action programs is to establish equal opportunities for women and men. Past research has focused on one type of affirmative action, namely quotas, and found that the implementation of quotas is often met by a backlash from employees. The current study adds to the literature by investigating fairness and importance perceptions of career development programs offered only to women at Austrian universities or the Austrian Science Fund. Using the model of attitudes toward affirmative action programs the current experimental study tested whether providing participants with information about the benefits (gain-message condition) or costs (loss-message condition) of the implementation of affirmative action programs influenced participants’ perceptions of affirmative action programs. In the current online study, the 510 participants (52.5% cisgender women and 47.5% cisgender men; Mage = 29.5, SD = 9.5) from German-speaking countries in Europe gave on average higher fairness and importance ratings to career development programs offered to all employees than to such programs offered specifically to women. Men in the gain-message condition and loss-message condition gave higher fairness ratings to affirmative action programs than did men in the control condition (i.e., men who read a text that gave no justification for the implementation of affirmative action programs). Men in the gain-message condition also gave higher importance ratings to affirmative action programs than did men in the control condition. Women were not influenced in their ratings by the justification of the implementation of affirmative action programs. Nevertheless, women’s perceptions of affirmative action programs were more favorable than men’s. When implementing affirmative action programs in organizations, providing information that explains why affirmative action is needed and how all employees benefit therefrom can increase support from men who, as seen from past research, are known to be most opposed to affirmative action.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikola Komlenac & Liora Neugebauer & Jennifer Birke & Margarethe Hochleitner, 2023. "All employees benefit: arguments that help increase support for affirmative action in academic careers," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02508-x
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-02508-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-023-02508-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-023-02508-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Matthew B. Ross & Britta M. Glennon & Raviv Murciano-Goroff & Enrico G. Berkes & Bruce A. Weinberg & Julia I. Lane, 2022. "Women are credited less in science than men," Nature, Nature, vol. 608(7921), pages 135-145, August.
    3. 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.
    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. Kwiek, Marek & Szymula, Łukasz, 2024. "Growth of Science and Women: Methodological Challenges of Using Structured Big Data," SocArXiv w34pr, Center for Open Science.
    2. Yining Wang & Qiang Wu & Liangyu Li, 2024. "Examining the influence of women scientists on scientific impact and novelty: insights from top business journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3517-3542, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Zhou, Sifan & Chai, Sen & Freeman, Richard B., 2024. "Gender homophily: In-group citation preferences and the gender disadvantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    5. Nakajima, Kazuki & Liu, Ruodan & Shudo, Kazuyuki & Masuda, Naoki, 2023. "Quantifying gender imbalance in East Asian academia: Research career and citation practice," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    6. 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).
    7. Lu Liu & Benjamin F. Jones & Brian Uzzi & Dashun Wang, 2023. "Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1046-1058, July.
    8. Lin Zhang & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Gender differences among active reviewers: an investigation based on publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 145-179, January.
    9. Wenxuan Shi & Renli Wu, 2024. "Women’s strength in science: exploring the influence of female participation on research impact and innovation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4529-4551, July.
    10. María Rosario Román Gálvez & Blanca Riquelme-Gallego & María del Carmen Segovia-García & Daniel Gavilán-Cabello & Khalid Saeed Khan & Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas, 2022. "Variations in Author Gender in Obstetrics Disease Prevalence Literature: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Hoekman, Jarno & Rake, Bastian, 2024. "Geography of authorship: How geography shapes authorship attribution in big team science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    12. Wu, Jiang & Ou, Guiyan & Liu, Xiaohui & Dong, Ke, 2022. "How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    13. Francisca M. Antman & Kirk B. Doran & Xuechao Qian & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2024. "Half Empty and Half Full? Women in Economics and the Rise in Gender-Related Research," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 114, pages 226-231, May.
    14. Chaojiang Wu & Erjia Yan & Yongjun Zhu & Kai Li, 2021. "Gender imbalance in the productivity of funded projects: A study of the outputs of National Institutes of Health R01 grants," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(11), pages 1386-1399, November.
    15. Kwiek, Marek & Roszka, Wojciech, 2021. "Gender-based homophily in research: A large-scale study of man-woman collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    16. Josh Yamamoto & Eitan Frachtenberg, 2022. "Gender Differences in Collaboration Patterns in Computer Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, February.
    17. Sorana-Alexandra Constantinescu & Maria-Henriete Pozsar, 2022. "Was This Supposed to Be on the Test? Academic Leadership, Gender and the COVID-19 Pandemic in Denmark, Hungary, Romania, and United Kingdom," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, April.
    18. Ann-Maree Vallence & Mark R Hinder & Hakuei Fujiyama, 2019. "Data-driven selection of conference speakers based on scientific impact to achieve gender parity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, July.
    19. Lee, Jangwook & Chung, Jiyoon, 2022. "Women in top management teams and their impact on innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02508-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.