IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reihed/v60y2019i7d10.1007_s11162-018-09542-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Research, Teaching, and Leadership Roles are Recommended to Male and Female Engineering Faculty Differently

Author

Listed:
  • Eugene Judson

    (Arizona State University)

  • Lydia Ross

    (Arizona State University)

  • Kristi Glassmeyer

    (Arizona State University)

Abstract

Across disciplines, male faculty spend more time on research than female faculty. Yet, women tend to teach and mentor students more hours than men (Misra et al. in Glob J Eng Educ 14(1):119–131, 2011). These disparities play pivotal roles in tenure and promotion decisions wherein research and leadership roles are most valued (Green in J Soc Work Educ 44(2):117–128, 2008). There is considerable evidence suggesting that implicit biases underpin some of these faculty roles differences, particularly in male-dominated disciplines, such as engineering. At the same time, there is limited evidence that, once aware of gender inequity, individuals will engage in bias correction in order to rectify prejudice. This study was designed to evaluate if implicit bias or bias correction could be detected when faculty considered the most appropriate roles for other faculty. Faculty from 50 colleges of engineering completed an activity wherein they assigned five fictitious engineering faculty characters to five assignments (one research, one leadership, and three teaching/advising roles). One version of the activity contained only male names; the other version was identical except for the change of the middle character’s name from male (Charlie) to female (Cathy). Results indicated that both men and women were significantly more likely to select Cathy for both the leadership and research positions over Charlie. Regression analysis of the Cathy Group data indicated respondents’ gender did not predict selection of Cathy to the leadership role; however, women were significantly more likely than men to select Cathy to do research.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugene Judson & Lydia Ross & Kristi Glassmeyer, 2019. "How Research, Teaching, and Leadership Roles are Recommended to Male and Female Engineering Faculty Differently," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 60(7), pages 1025-1047, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:60:y:2019:i:7:d:10.1007_s11162-018-09542-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11162-018-09542-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11162-018-09542-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11162-018-09542-8?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. Francine Blau & Peter Brummund & Albert Liu, 2013. "Trends in Occupational Segregation by Gender 1970–2009: Adjusting for the Impact of Changes in the Occupational Coding System," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 50(2), pages 471-492, April.
    2. Richard Bernardi & Steven Guptill, 2008. "Social Desirability Response Bias, Gender, and Factors Influencing Organizational Commitment: An International Study," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(4), pages 797-809, September.
    3. Derek Dalton & Marc Ortegren, 2011. "Gender Differences in Ethics Research: The Importance of Controlling for the Social Desirability Response Bias," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 73-93, September.
    4. Ivar Krumpal, 2013. "Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2025-2047, June.
    5. Michael Baker & Kirsten Cornelson, 2018. "Gender-Based Occupational Segregation and Sex Differences in Sensory, Motor, and Spatial Aptitudes," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1749-1775, October.
    6. James S. Fairweather, 2002. "The Mythologies of Faculty Productivity," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(1), pages 26-48, January.
    7. Linda Babcock & Maria P. Recalde & Lise Vesterlund & Laurie Weingart, 2017. "Gender Differences in Accepting and Receiving Requests for Tasks with Low Promotability," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(3), pages 714-747, March.
    8. Simonetta Manfredi, 2017. "Increasing Gender Diversity in Senior Roles in HE: Who Is Afraid of Positive Action?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Jordi Duch & Xiao Han T Zeng & Marta Sales-Pardo & Filippo Radicchi & Shayna Otis & Teresa K Woodruff & Luís A Nunes Amaral, 2012. "The Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-11, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vitus Püttmann & Jens Ruhose & Stephan L. Thomsen, 2023. "Academics’ Attitudes Toward Engaging in Public Discussions: Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Engagement Conditions," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 64(5), pages 765-788, August.

    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. Michael Baker & Kirsten Cornelson, 2018. "Gender-Based Occupational Segregation and Sex Differences in Sensory, Motor, and Spatial Aptitudes," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1749-1775, October.
    2. Foster Frempong, 2019. "Gender and Ethical Conduct of Hotel Employees in Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 721-731, February.
    3. Peter Kuhn & Kailing Shen, 2023. "What Happens When Employers Can No Longer Discriminate in Job Ads?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(4), pages 1013-1048, April.
    4. Saar Bossuyt & Patrick Kenhove, 2018. "Assertiveness Bias in Gender Ethics Research: Why Women Deserve the Benefit of the Doubt," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 727-739, July.
    5. Creso Sá & Summer Cowley & Magdalena Martinez & Nadiia Kachynska & Emma Sabzalieva, 2020. "Gender gaps in research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in the U.S., Canada, and South Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.
    6. Benny, Liza & Bhalotra, Sonia & Fernández, Manuel, 2021. "Occupation flexibility and the graduate gender wage gap in the UK," ISER Working Paper Series 2021-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    7. K. G. Priyashantha & A. Chamaru De Alwis & I. Welmilla, 2023. "Three Perspectives on Changing Gender Stereotypes," FIIB Business Review, , vol. 12(2), pages 120-131, June.
    8. Cobb-Clark, Deborah A., 2016. "Biology and Gender in the Labor Market," IZA Discussion Papers 10386, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Nayoung Rim, 2021. "The Effect of Title IX on Gender Disparity in Graduate Education," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(2), pages 521-552, March.
    10. Bhalotra, Sonia R & Fernández, Manuel & Wang, Fan, 2022. "The distribution of the gender wage gap : An equilibrium model," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 614, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    11. Leanne Roncolato & Alex Roomets, 2020. "Who will change the “baby?” Examining the power of gender in an experimental setting," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 823-852, September.
    12. Katie Meara & Francesco Pastore & Allan Webster, 2020. "The gender pay gap in the USA: a matching study," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 271-305, January.
    13. Aycinena, Diego & Bogliacino, Francesco & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2024. "Measuring norms: Assessing the threat of social desirability bias to the Bicchieri and Xiao elicitation method," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 225-239.
    14. Kouki, Amairisa, 2023. "Beyond the “Comforts” of work from home: Child health and the female wage penalty," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    15. Nicolás Ajzenman & Bruno Ferman & Sant’Anna Pedro C., 2023. "Discrimination in the Formation of Academic Networks: A Field Experiment on #EconTwitter," Working Papers 235, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    16. Alan Kirman & François Laisney & Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2023. "Relaxing the symmetry assumption in participation games: a specification test for cluster-heterogeneity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(4), pages 850-878, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Stephanie Kelley, 2022. "Employee Perceptions of the Effective Adoption of AI Principles," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(4), pages 871-893, July.
    19. Michael T Gastner & Károly Takács & Máté Gulyás & Zsuzsanna Szvetelszky & Beáta Oborny, 2019. "The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, June.
    20. Stephan HUMPERT, 2015. "Gender-based Segregation before and after the Great Recession," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(4(605), W), pages 53-62, Winter.

    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:spr:reihed:v:60:y:2019:i:7:d:10.1007_s11162-018-09542-8. 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: http://www.springer.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.