Implicit bias in academia: A challenge to the meritocratic principle and to women’s careers – and what to do about it LERU paper Jadranka Gvozdanović Katrien Maes Tomas Brage, Karin Gilland-Lutz, Brigitte Mantilleri, Jane Norman and the LERU Thematic Group Gender
23
Embed
Implicit bias in academia: A challenge to the meritocratic ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Implicit bias in academia: A challenge to the meritocratic principle and to women’s careers – and what to do
about it
LERU paperJadranka Gvozdanović
Katrien MaesTomas Brage, Karin Gilland-Lutz, Brigitte Mantilleri, Jane Norman
• Making application and selection procedures fully transparent,with the relevant criteria determined at the outset;
• Critically reviewing the language of advertisements,recommendations and evaluations;
• Prioritising research quality (by criteria such as innovation,originality and methodological rigour, not just bibliometrical data)over quantity;
• Using partially anonymised CV evaluation in two rounds: a firstround listing formal qualifications, and a second round ofqualitative evaluation;
• Briefing selection committees about bias pitfalls;• Including external observers and evaluators in these processes.• Critically evaluating all selection and promotion procedures.
20
Recommendations to research institutions,
funders and policy makers
• R1. Monitor career development and assign clear responsibilities.• R2. Make plans to correct gender bias established by monitoring.• R3. Offer training for recognising and mitigating bias.• R4. Institutionalise transparent recruitment processes involvingexternal observers and evaluators.
• R5. Evaluate the language of recommendations and evaluations.• R6. Eliminate gender pay gap.• R7. Compensate employees for parental leave.• R8. Monitor precarious contracts and part-time positions for anygender-based differences and correct any inequalities.
• R9. Undertake positive action towards a proper representation ofwomen in all leading positions.
Ahlqvist,V.,Andersson,J.,Söderqvist,l.&TumponeJ.(2015).Agenderneutralprocess?Aqualitativestudyoftheevaluationoftheresearchgrantapplications2014.Stockholm:SwedishResearchCouncil.Ceci,S.J.&W.M.Williams(2011).Understandingcurrentcausesofwomen’sunderrepresentationinscience.PNAS(ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences) 108(8):3157–3162.Hennig,Margaret– AnneJardim(1977)TheMenagerialWoman:TheSurvivalManualforWomeninBusiness.AnchorPress.Moss-Racusin,C.A.,Dovidio,J.F.,Brescoli,V.L.,Graham,M.J.&J.Handelsman(2012).Sciencefaculty’ssubtlegenderbiasesfavourmalestudents,PNAS 109(41)16474-16479.She Figures 2015. Brussels: European Commission.Valian,Virginia(1998).Whysoslow?TheAdvancementofWomen. TheMITPress.VandenBesselaar,PeterandUlfSandström.(2016).Genderdifferencesinresearchperformanceanditsimpactoncareers.Scientometrics2016,106:143-162.VandenBesselaar,P.,Sandström,U.(2017)Viciouscirclesofgenderbias,lowerpositions,andlowerperformance:Genderdifferencesinscholarlyproductivityandimpact.PLoSONE12(8):e0183301.VanderLee,R.&Ellemers,N.(2015).GendercontributestopersonalresearchsuccessintheNetherlands.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences 112(40),12349-12353.Wennerås,C.,&Wold,A.(1997).Nepotismandsexisminpeer-review.Nature,387,341–343.Zenger, J. & Folkman, J. (2012). Are women better leaders than men? Harvard Business ReviewZogmaister, C., Arcuri, L., Castelli, L. & Smith, E.R. (2008). The Impact of Loyalty and Equality on Implicit IngroupFavoritism. In: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 11, 4, 493-512.