An article published in the New York Times yesterday describes a study which found that science professors at American Universities show bias against women when deciding whether to offer a job to a potential candidate and while making a decision of how much the candidate should be paid.
"All of the professors received the same one-page summary, which
portrayed the applicant as promising but not stellar. But in half of the
descriptions, the mythical applicant was named John and in half the
applicant was named Jennifer." On a scale of 1 to 7 (with 7 being highest), John was given an average rating of 4 for confidence, while Jennifer received an average rating of 3.3. John was offered an average starting salary of $30,328, while the average starting salary for Jennifer was $26,508.
When the senior author of the article was discussing previous studies that had demonstrated similar results of bias in other occupations with her colleagues, "many responded that scientists would rise above it because
they were trained to analyze objective data rationally". I found this to be an interesting sentiment that may shed insight on our anthropological understanding of scientists in this class.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/science/bias-persists-against-women-of-science-a-study-says.html?_r=1
No comments:
Post a Comment