Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023;10(1):201.
doi: 10.1057/s41599-023-01722-x. Epub 2023 May 4.

Bias against parents in science hits women harder

Affiliations

Bias against parents in science hits women harder

Fernanda Staniscuaski et al. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2023.

Abstract

Worldwide, parenthood remains a major driver for the reduced participation of women in the job market, where discrimination stems from people's biases against mothers, based on stereotypes and misconceptions surrounding the vision of motherhood in our society. In academia, parenthood may be perceived as negatively affecting scientists' commitment and dedication, especially women's. We conducted a survey amongst Brazilian scientists and found that mothers self-reported a higher prevalence of negative bias in their workplace when compared to fathers. The perception of a negative bias was influenced by gender and career status, but not by race, scientific field or number of children. Regarding intersections, mothers with less than 15 years of hiring reported having suffered a higher rate of negative bias against themselves. We discuss implications of these results and suggest how this negative bias should be addressed in order to promote an equitable environment that does not harm women in science.

Keywords: Education; Science, technology and society.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Self-perception of negative bias towards parents in academia.
Results are shown in percentage by the reported gender of the respondents (male, top line; female, bottom line), using a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 meant “I completely disagree”, and 5 “I completely agree”.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Total score predictors.
Forest plot depicting the predictor’s estimates (95% confidence interval) of the regression model with the total score of self-perception bias against parents as the dependent variable.

References

    1. Aranda B, Glick P. Signaling devotion to work over family undermines the motherhood penalty. Group Process Intergr Relat. 2014;17:91–99. doi: 10.1177/1368430213485996. - DOI
    1. Areas R, Abreu ARP, Santana AE et al. (2020) Gender and the scissors graph of Brazilian science: from equality to invisibility. Available at 10.31219/osf.io/m6eb4. Acessed Aug 08 2022
    1. Arena DF, Volpone SD, Jones KP (2022) Overcoming) Maternity bias in the workplace: a systematic review. J Manage 49:52–84. 10.1177/01492063221086243
    1. Benard S, Correll S. Normative discrimination and the motherhood penalty. Gender Soc. 2010;24:616–646. doi: 10.1177/0891243210383142. - DOI
    1. Budig MJ, England P. The wage penalty for motherhood. Am Sociol Rev. 2001;66:204–225. doi: 10.2307/2657415. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources