Feedback
Science

Study: Scientists Favor Female Applicants by 2-to-1 Margin

When hundreds of U.S. college faculty members rated junior scientists based on their scholarly record, job interview performance and other information with an eye toward which should be hired, they preferred women over identically qualified men two-to-one, scientists reported on Monday.

Women have always been scarce in academic science, technology, engineering, and math, or STEM. That has been attributed to gender bias, prejudice against women who take maternity leave and other discrimination.

Recently, however, women with advanced STEM degrees have had a better chance of getting university jobs. For example, out of 96 mathematics hires from 1995 through 2003, 20 percent of applicants were women, but 32 percent of those offered jobs were female. Some scholars have said this apparent female advantage was because women who overcome the hurdles to a STEM Ph.D. are generally stronger candidates than male counterparts.

To test that hypothesis, Cornell University's Wendy Williams and Stephen Ceci ran five related experiments. They sent descriptions of made-up job candidates in biology and psychology (where women are well represented) and economics and engineering (where they are not) to 873 faculty members at 371 colleges. The experiments differed in, among other things, how many candidates the participants evaluated (one or three, so participants would be less likely to guess this was a men vs. women study).

Overall, even though their qualifications and characteristics were identical, women were ranked first by 67 percent of participants, the authors report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. That contradicts a 2012 study in which academics gave higher ratings to hypothetical job candidates with male names than those with female names (and identical resumes).

The bias toward women "was totally unexpected," Williams said. "We were shocked."

The study does not prove that women no longer face discrimination in academic science, "but these data speak to a real change," Williams said.

Is Newsweek’s new cover sexist? 1:22

IN-DEPTH

SOCIAL

—Reuters