PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Breaking the glass door in academia? Looking at the role of scientific fields and contextual factors in moderating the gender gap in recruitment: evidence from Italy Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-07-15)Gaiaschi, CamillaWomen's presence in academia has sharply increased in recent years, but gender inequalities in career progression persist. Italy makes no exception to this trend as different studies on the promotion gap to associate and to full professors have suggested. However, no measure of the adjusted gender differential in the previous steps of the career, that is in the transition from the post-doc to the assistant professor position, has been provided so far. This paper aims to fulfill this gap by means of an original, longitudinal, and multi-source dataset on the Italian academic population which has allowed to measure the female disadvantage in recruitment by controlling for a large set of confounding characteristics including individual productivity and, most especially, contextual factors, which have been under-explored so far. Results suggest that women face a small adjusted penalty, of around 3-4%, in academic recruitment. However, when disentangling the analyses by scientific field, strong differences emerge, with the gap reaching a maximum of - 10% in physics while being non-significant in many SSH. Within the STEMM, the life sciences, driven by medicine and biology, appear more gender unequal than many hard sciences. Moreover, a growing number of female full professors in the sub-field and working in a department with good financial resources represent two factors that have a moderate role in reducing the gap. All in all, this work sheds light on the importance of organizational and institutional factors in explaining the gender gap thus calling for structural interventions to make universities more inclusive towards women.Item type:Publication, Institutionalization of the sciences, gender system, and scientific production in Brazil (1939-1969) Open PDF(2008) ;Ferreira, L.O. ;Azevedo, N. ;Guedes, M.Cortes, B.Thanks to policies put in place in the 1930s, women's experiences in higher education increased their professional participation in the academic and scientific worlds. Largely neglected in Brazilian historiography of the sciences, analysis of this phenomenon introduces a new perspective on the meaning of institutionalization and professionalization of scientific activities, a process in which women have played an authentic role. We explore their presence by analyzing the scientific production published in four journals between 1939 and 1969. Gender differences are detected according to the standard of the publication.Item type:Publication, Women's underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations Open PDF(American Psychological Association, 2009) ;Ceci, Stephen J. ;Williams, Wendy M.Barnett, Susan M.The underrepresentation of women at the top of math-intensive fields is controversial, with competing claims of biological and sociocultural causation. The authors develop a framework to delineate possible causal pathways and evaluate evidence for each. Biological evidence is contradictory and inconclusive. Although cross-cultural and cross-cohort differences suggest a powerful effect of sociocultural context, evidence for specific factors is inconsistent and contradictory. Factors unique to underrepresentation in math-intensive fields include the following: (a) Math-proficient women disproportionately prefer careers in non–math-intensive fields and are more likely to leave math-intensive careers as they advance; (b) more men than women score in the extreme math-proficient range on gatekeeper tests, such as the SAT Mathematics and the Graduate Record Examinations Quantitative Reasoning sections; (c) women with high math competence are disproportionately more likely to have high verbal competence, allowing greater choice of professions; and (d) in some math-intensive fields, women with children are penalized in promotion rates. The evidence indicates that women's preferences, potentially representing both free and constrained choices, constitute the most powerful explanatory factor; a secondary factor is performance on gatekeeper tests, most likely resulting from sociocultural rather than biological causes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)